From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753285AbbEGLJF (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 7 May 2015 07:09:05 -0400
Received: from e28smtp08.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.8]:48106 "EHLO
	e28smtp08.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752145AbbEGLJD (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 7 May 2015 07:09:03 -0400
Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 16:38:52 +0530
From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>,
        Anton Arapov <arapov@gmail.com>, David Long <dave.long@linaro.org>,
        Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>,
        "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Jan Willeke <willeke@de.ibm.com>, Jim Keniston <jkenisto@us.ibm.com>,
        Mark Wielaard <mjw@redhat.com>, Pratyush Anand <panand@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/10] uprobes/x86: Introduce arch_uretprobe_is_alive()
Message-ID: <20150507110852.GF30396@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reply-To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <20150504124835.GA22462@redhat.com>
 <20150504124914.GA22512@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150504124914.GA22512@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER
x-cbid: 15050711-0029-0000-0000-000005BA38D5
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/uprobes.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/uprobes.h
> index f011fd0..60777f3 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/uprobes.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/uprobes.h
> @@ -57,6 +57,7 @@ struct arch_uprobe {
>  };
> 
>  struct arch_uretprobe {
> +	unsigned long	sp;

While this looks good, I was wondering if you did think of having the sp
in the return_instance structure itself. I mean can we use
user_stack_pointer() to populate the ri->sp?
In which case the weak function itself should suffice for most archs.

Something like this.
prepare_uretprobe() we can have
ri->sp = user_stack_pointer(regs)

and handle_trampoline() would call something like 

	arch_uretprobe_is_alive(next->sp, regs);

bool __weak arch_uretprobe_is_alive(unsigned long sp, struct pt_regs *regs)
{
	return user_stack_pointer(regs) <= sp;
}

Am I missing something?

> 
-- 
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju