lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 01/17] Fix "x86/alternatives: Lockdep-enforce text_mutex in text_poke*()"
Date
> On Jan 25, 2019, at 1:30 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 04:32:43PM -0800, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
>> From: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
>>
>> text_mutex is currently expected to be held before text_poke() is
>> called, but we kgdb does not take the mutex, and instead *supposedly*
>> ensures the lock is not taken and will not be acquired by any other core
>> while text_poke() is running.
>>
>> The reason for the "supposedly" comment is that it is not entirely clear
>> that this would be the case if gdb_do_roundup is zero.
>
> I guess that variable name is "kgdb_do_roundup” ?

Yes. Will fix.

>
>> This patch creates two wrapper functions, text_poke() and
>
> Avoid having "This patch" or "This commit" in the commit message. It is
> tautologically useless.
>
> Also, do
>
> $ git grep 'This patch' Documentation/process
>
> for more details.

Ok.

>>
>> +void *text_poke_kgdb(void *addr, const void *opcode, size_t len)
>
> text_poke_unlocked() I guess. I don't think kgdb is that special that it
> needs its own function flavor.

Tglx suggested this naming to prevent anyone from misusing text_poke_kdgb().
This is a very specific use-case that nobody else should need.

Regards,
Nadav
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-25 19:29    [W:0.064 / U:4.584 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site