linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
	Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	songliubraving@fb.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 0/6] x86: dynamic indirect branch promotion
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 20:01:04 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190108190104.GC1900@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D1A153D5-D23B-45E6-9E7A-EB9CBAE84B7E@gmail.com>

On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 10:28:02AM -0800, Nadav Amit wrote:
> Is it really that important for debugging to get the instructions at the
> time of execution? Wouldn’t it be easier to annotate the instructions that
> might change? After all, it is not as if any instruction can change to any
> other instruction.

I think PT has a bitstream encoding of branch-taken; to decode and
follow the actual code-flow you then need to have the actual and
accurate branch target from the code. If we go muck about with the code
and change that, decoding gets somewhat 'tricky'.

Or something along those lines..

  reply	other threads:[~2019-01-08 19:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-31  7:21 [RFC v2 0/6] x86: dynamic indirect branch promotion Nadav Amit
2018-12-31  7:21 ` [RFC v2 1/6] x86: introduce kernel restartable sequence Nadav Amit
2018-12-31 20:08   ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-12-31 21:12     ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-03 22:21   ` Andi Kleen
2019-01-03 22:29     ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-03 22:48       ` Andi Kleen
2019-01-03 22:52         ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-03 23:40           ` Andi Kleen
2019-01-03 23:56             ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-04  0:34   ` hpa
2018-12-31  7:21 ` [RFC v2 2/6] objtool: ignore instructions Nadav Amit
2018-12-31  7:21 ` [RFC v2 3/6] x86: patch indirect branch promotion Nadav Amit
2018-12-31  7:21 ` [RFC v2 4/6] x86: interface for accessing indirect branch locations Nadav Amit
2018-12-31  7:21 ` [RFC v2 5/6] x86: learning and patching indirect branch targets Nadav Amit
2018-12-31 20:05   ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-12-31 21:07     ` Nadav Amit
2018-12-31  7:21 ` [RFC v2 6/6] x86: outline optpoline Nadav Amit
2018-12-31 19:51 ` [RFC v2 0/6] x86: dynamic indirect branch promotion Andy Lutomirski
2018-12-31 19:53   ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-03 18:10     ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-03 18:30       ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-03 20:31         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-01-03 22:18 ` Andi Kleen
2019-01-07 16:32   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-01-08  7:47     ` Adrian Hunter
2019-01-08  9:25       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-01-08 10:01         ` Adrian Hunter
2019-01-08 10:10           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-01-08 17:27             ` Andi Kleen
2019-01-08 18:28               ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-08 19:01                 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2019-01-08 20:47                   ` Nadav Amit
2019-01-08 20:53                     ` Andi Kleen
2019-01-09 10:35                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-29  8:23                       ` Tracing text poke / kernel self-modifying code (Was: Re: [RFC v2 0/6] x86: dynamic indirect branch promotion) Adrian Hunter
2019-08-29  8:53                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-29  9:40                           ` Adrian Hunter
2019-08-29 11:46                             ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-09-12  7:00                               ` Adrian Hunter
2019-09-12 12:17                                 ` hpa
2019-01-08 18:57               ` [RFC v2 0/6] x86: dynamic indirect branch promotion Peter Zijlstra

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=20190108190104.GC1900@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dwmw@amazon.co.uk \
    --cc=ecree@solarflare.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=nadav.amit@gmail.com \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).