Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 01/10] arm64: Add HAVE_REGS_AND_STACK_ACCESS_API
 feature
To: David Long <dave.long@linaro.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Sandeepa Prabhu <sandeepa.s.prabhu@gmail.com>,
        William Cohen <wcohen@redhat.com>, Pratyush Anand <panand@redhat.com>,
        Steve Capper <steve.capper@linaro.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <1461783185-9056-1-git-send-email-dave.long@linaro.org>
 <1461783185-9056-2-git-send-email-dave.long@linaro.org>
Cc: Dave P Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Robin Murphy <Robin.Murphy@arm.com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
        Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@linaro.org>,
        Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Alex_Benn=c3=a9e?= <alex.bennee@linaro.org>,
        Yang Shi <yang.shi@linaro.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>,
        John Blackwood <john.blackwood@ccur.com>, Feng Kan <fkan@apm.com>,
        Balamurugan Shanmugam <bshanmugam@apm.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
        Vladimir Murzin <Vladimir.Murzin@arm.com>,
        Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@android.com>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Organization: ARM Ltd
Message-ID: <57223593.1000503@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 17:08:51 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Icedove/38.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1461783185-9056-2-git-send-email-dave.long@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2964
Lines: 103

On 27/04/16 19:52, David Long wrote:
> From: "David A. Long" <dave.long@linaro.org>
> 
> Add HAVE_REGS_AND_STACK_ACCESS_API feature for arm64.

And clearly a lot more.

> 
> Signed-off-by: David A. Long <dave.long@linaro.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig              |   1 +
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h |  33 ++++++++++-
>  arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c      | 118 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 151 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> index 4f43622..8f662fd 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> @@ -80,6 +80,7 @@ config ARM64
>  	select HAVE_PERF_EVENTS
>  	select HAVE_PERF_REGS
>  	select HAVE_PERF_USER_STACK_DUMP
> +	select HAVE_REGS_AND_STACK_ACCESS_API
>  	select HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE
>  	select HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS
>  	select IOMMU_DMA if IOMMU_SUPPORT
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h
> index a307eb6..ee02637 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h
> @@ -119,6 +119,8 @@ struct pt_regs {
>  	u64 syscallno;
>  };
>  
> +#define MAX_REG_OFFSET offsetof(struct pt_regs, pstate)
> +
>  #define arch_has_single_step()	(1)
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
> @@ -147,6 +149,35 @@ struct pt_regs {
>  #define user_stack_pointer(regs) \
>  	(!compat_user_mode(regs) ? (regs)->sp : (regs)->compat_sp)
>  
> +extern int regs_query_register_offset(const char *name);
> +extern const char *regs_query_register_name(unsigned int offset);
> +extern bool regs_within_kernel_stack(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long addr);
> +extern unsigned long regs_get_kernel_stack_nth(struct pt_regs *regs,
> +					       unsigned int n);
> +
> +/**
> + * regs_get_register() - get register value from its offset
> + * @regs:	   pt_regs from which register value is gotten
> + * @offset:    offset number of the register.

Is it the offset? or the number?

> + *
> + * regs_get_register returns the value of a register whose offset from @regs.
> + * The @offset is the offset of the register in struct pt_regs.
> + * If @offset is bigger than MAX_REG_OFFSET, this returns 0.
> + */
> +static inline u64 regs_get_register(struct pt_regs *regs,
> +					      unsigned int offset)
> +{
> +	if (unlikely(offset > MAX_REG_OFFSET))
> +		return 0;
> +	return *(u64 *)((u64)regs + offset);

So clearly it is the offset. But is 3 a valid value? I don't think so.
How about something slightly more type safe:

	u64 val = 0;

	WARN_ON(offset & 7);

	offset >>= 3;
	switch (offset) {
	case	0 ... 30:
		val = regs->reg[offset];
		break;
	case	31:
		val = regs->sp;
		break;
	case	32:
		val = regs->pc;
		break;
	case	33:
 		val = regs->pstate;
		break;
	}

	return val;

I'm pretty sure you could replace 31/32/33 with macros using offsetof().
The compiler may even optimize this to something similar to what you
already have.

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...