Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752107AbdF3PzE (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jun 2017 11:55:04 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60224 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751695AbdF3PzD (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jun 2017 11:55:03 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 9F8BD9D0F6 Authentication-Results: ext-mx10.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx10.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=jpoimboe@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 9F8BD9D0F6 Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 10:55:00 -0500 From: Josh Poimboeuf To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: X86 ML , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , live-patching@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Jiri Slaby , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , Mike Galbraith Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/8] x86/entry: add unwind hint annotations Message-ID: <20170630155500.vnn5szd6smpn5nrz@treble> References: <20170629190559.ttw52ahwtsjynayx@treble> <20170629214134.c36krjhvzegwkfjk@treble> <20170630021249.cqkszxaqtwakmzpg@treble> <20170630131148.yszdjakekrwqlf6k@treble> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0.1 (2016-04-01) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.39]); Fri, 30 Jun 2017 15:55:02 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1144 Lines: 38 On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 08:44:40AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > A few comments about the first patch: > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/luto/linux.git/commit/?h=x86/entry_irq_stack&id=3e2aa2102cc1c5e60d4a8637bff78d0478a55059 > > > > - It uses a '693:' label instead of '.Lirqs_off_\@:' > > Touché! > > > > > - There's a comment I don't follow: > > > > "Anything that can interrupt us here without using IST must be > > *extremely* careful to limit its stack usage." > > > > What specifically could interrupt there without using IST? > > #DB, later on in the series. I'll update the comment. > > > > > - Since do_softirq_own_stack() is a callable function, I think it still > > needs to save rbp. > > Whoops. > > > > > - Why change the "jmp error_exit" to "ret" in > > xen_do_hypervisor_callback()? > > To match the other change I made there. I removed both. One more thing I forgot to mention: if you could use r10 instead of r11, that would be helpful because it means one less register undwarf needs to know about. (It already deals with r10 because of GCC stack realignment). -- Josh