mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com>
To: "Chuck Ebbert" <76306.1226@compuserve.com>
Cc: "Andi Kleen" <ak@suse.de>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] i386: annotate the rest of entry.s::nmi
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 08:55:28 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <44E03A80.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200608111916_MC3-1-C7D7-ACA4@compuserve.com>

>> 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...

Hmm, yes, on a second look I agree.

Jan

  reply	other threads:[~2006-08-14  6:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-08-11 23:13 Chuck Ebbert
2006-08-14  6:55 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
  -- 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=44E03A80.76E4.0078.0@novell.com \
    --to=jbeulich@novell.com \
    --cc=76306.1226@compuserve.com \
    --cc=ak@suse.de \
    --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