Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751403AbaDPDsH (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Apr 2014 23:48:07 -0400 Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:38165 "EHLO userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750998AbaDPDsF (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Apr 2014 23:48:05 -0400 Message-ID: <534DFD61.4070700@oracle.com> Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 23:47:45 -0400 From: Sasha Levin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "H. Peter Anvin" , Masami Hiramatsu CC: vegard.nossum@oracle.com, penberg@kernel.org, jamie.iles@oracle.com, mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86/insn: Extract more information about instructions References: <1397497450-6440-1-git-send-email-sasha.levin@oracle.com> <1397497450-6440-3-git-send-email-sasha.levin@oracle.com> <534CA38C.80501@hitachi.com> <534D4BF3.3020102@oracle.com> <534DF868.2020901@zytor.com> In-Reply-To: <534DF868.2020901@zytor.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Source-IP: acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 04/15/2014 11:26 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 04/15/2014 08:10 AM, Sasha Levin wrote: >> >> Mnemonics don't have 1:1 relationship with opcodes. So, for example, >> if kmemcheck needs to check (and it does) whether a given instruction >> is an "ADD", it would need to compare it to 9 different opcodes. >> > > Excuse me, but on what planet does, for example, it makes sense if a > particular instruction is a "MOV", for example? The trend in x86 > opcodes have varied over the years and at some points it seems to have > been trendy to have very general mnemonics (consider MOV CR, MOV DR) and > at some points quite the opposite (hence MOVD, MOVQ, MOVDQA, MOVDQU, > MOVAPS, MOVUPS, MOVAPD, MOVUPD, VMOVxxx). > > So it is not at all clear that this makes any kind of sense whatsoever, > and is more likely just going to be abused. Looking at kmemcheck, and "AND" vs "MOV" for example, we need to know if a given instruction is AND because AND may operate on only part of the memory it's accessing to. So some accesses to what kmemcheck sees as "uninitialized memory" are actually valid ones because we don't touch the uninitialized part. So for kmemcheck, AND and MOV (for example) are different because ANDing a value and MOVing a value mean different things wrt to uninitialized memory. Yes, if kmemcheck for some reason needs to figure out if an instruction is a MOV variant we'll need to list quite a few mnemonics, but that list will be much shorter and more readable than a corresponding list of opcodes. Thanks, Sasha -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/