On 2017/06/22 11:14PM, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 21:14:21 +1000
> Michael Ellerman wrote:
>
> > Nicholas Piggin writes:
> >
> > > On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:08:40 +0530
> > > "Naveen N. Rao" wrote:
> > >
> > >> It is actually safe to probe system_call() in entry_64.S, but only
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 21:14:21 +1000
Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Nicholas Piggin writes:
>
> > On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:08:40 +0530
> > "Naveen N. Rao" wrote:
> >
> >> It is actually safe to probe system_call() in entry_64.S, but only till
> >> we unset MSR_RI. To allow this, add a new symbol syst
Nicholas Piggin writes:
> On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:08:40 +0530
> "Naveen N. Rao" wrote:
>
>> It is actually safe to probe system_call() in entry_64.S, but only till
>> we unset MSR_RI. To allow this, add a new symbol system_call_exit()
>> after the mtmsrd and blacklist that. Though the mtmsrd inst
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:08:40 +0530
"Naveen N. Rao" wrote:
> It is actually safe to probe system_call() in entry_64.S, but only till
> we unset MSR_RI. To allow this, add a new symbol system_call_exit()
> after the mtmsrd and blacklist that. Though the mtmsrd instruction
> itself is now whiteliste
It is actually safe to probe system_call() in entry_64.S, but only till
we unset MSR_RI. To allow this, add a new symbol system_call_exit()
after the mtmsrd and blacklist that. Though the mtmsrd instruction
itself is now whitelisted, we won't be allowed to probe on it as we
don't allow probing on r
