From: Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@compuserve.com>
To: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Andi Kleen" <ak@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [patch] i386: annotate the rest of entry.s::nmi
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 19:13:33 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200608111916_MC3-1-C7D7-ACA4@compuserve.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <44DC496D.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 09:10:05 +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> I understand now, but am still uncertain
> about the need to annotate FIX_STACK() - especially since you use
> .cfi_undefined, meaning the return point cannot be established anyway.
> If at all I'd annotate the initial pushes with either just the normal
> CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET, and the final one with one setting back the
> CFA base to the now adjusted frame. That way, until the pushes are
> complete the old frame will be used for determining the call origin,
> and once complete the (full) new state will be used.
But that's the whole point of the new annotations -- we have just
overwritten %esp with a new value and the old assumptions are
completely broken:
movl TSS_sysenter_esp0+offset(%esp),%esp; \
After this the old frame cannot be located by using %esp as a base
and the new frame is incomplete. So the only choice is to make eip
undefined until the new value is available -- if not then the
unwinder will try to use whatever random values are on the new frame.
Either that or I'm still unclear on how unwind works...
--
Chuck
next reply other threads:[~2006-08-11 23:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-08-11 23:13 Chuck Ebbert [this message]
2006-08-14 6:55 ` Jan Beulich
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-08-10 17:39 Chuck Ebbert
2006-08-11 7:10 ` Jan Beulich
2006-08-10 12:48 Chuck Ebbert
2006-08-10 12:58 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-10 13:39 ` Jan Beulich
2006-08-10 4:59 Chuck Ebbert
2006-08-10 5:20 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-10 8:23 ` Jan Beulich
2006-08-10 8:26 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-10 8:34 ` Jan Beulich
2006-08-11 17:46 ` Stas Sergeev
2006-08-14 6:52 ` Jan Beulich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200608111916_MC3-1-C7D7-ACA4@compuserve.com \
--to=76306.1226@compuserve.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=jbeulich@novell.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome