On 2017/06/29 09:01PM, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > On Thu, 29 Jun 2017 16:11:10 +0530 > "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n....@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > We can't take traps with relocation off, so blacklist enter_rtas() and > > rtas_return_loc(). However, instead of blacklisting all of enter_rtas(), > > introduce a new symbol __enter_rtas from where on we can't take a trap > > and blacklist that. > > > > Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n....@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > --- > > arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S b/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S > > index 0c27084800b6..16f4c4a1a294 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S > > @@ -1082,6 +1082,7 @@ _GLOBAL(enter_rtas) > > sync /* disable interrupts so SRR0/1 */ > > mtmsrd r0 /* don't get trashed */ > > > > +__enter_rtas: > > Hmm, am I missing something, or is there a reason to put these labels > after the mtmsr? Even if kprobes does the right thing, I think it's > easier to read the code if you cover the mtmsr as well.
I thought you asked for this, per your previous review comment: https://www.mail-archive.com/linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org/msg119667.html Or, did I get that wrong? Thanks, Naveen
