Hi Masami, On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:25:58PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 12:20:07 +0000 > James Morse <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 15/01/2019 06:25, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > Use arch_populate_kprobe_blacklist() instead of > > > arch_within_kprobe_blacklist() so that we can see the full > > > blacklisted symbols under the debugfs. > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c > > > b/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c > > > index b9e9758b6534..6c066c34c8a4 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes.c > > > @@ -465,26 +465,30 @@ kprobe_breakpoint_handler(struct pt_regs *regs, > > > unsigned int esr) > > > return DBG_HOOK_HANDLED; > > > } > > > > > > -bool arch_within_kprobe_blacklist(unsigned long addr) > > > +int __init arch_populate_kprobe_blacklist(void) > > > { > > > - if ((addr >= (unsigned long)__kprobes_text_start && > > > - addr < (unsigned long)__kprobes_text_end) || > > > - (addr >= (unsigned long)__entry_text_start && > > > - addr < (unsigned long)__entry_text_end) || > > > - (addr >= (unsigned long)__idmap_text_start && > > > - addr < (unsigned long)__idmap_text_end) || > > > > > - in_exception_text(addr)) > > > > You added this one in the previous patch, but it disappears here. > > Yes, it is easy to explain how we transcribe from > arch_within_kprobe_blacklist() to arch_populate_kprobe_blacklist(). > > > > > > > > - return true; > > > - > > > - if (!is_kernel_in_hyp_mode()) { > > > - if ((addr >= (unsigned long)__hyp_text_start && > > > - addr < (unsigned long)__hyp_text_end) || > > > - (addr >= (unsigned long)__hyp_idmap_text_start && > > > - addr < (unsigned long)__hyp_idmap_text_end)) > > > - return true; > > > - } > > > - > > > - return false; > > > + int ret; > > > > > > > + ret = kprobe_add_area_blacklist((unsigned long)__kprobes_text_start, > > > + (unsigned long)__kprobes_text_end); > > > + if (ret) > > > + return ret; > > > > Now that we have arch_populate_kprobe_blacklist(), does the arch-code need > > to > > blacklist the kprobes section itself? > > Ah, good catch! No, we don't need it here. Sorry I worked on older patch. > I'll update it.
Did you send a new version of this series? I can't seem to spot it in my inbox. Cheers, Will
