Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 14 Jan 2015 15:02:00 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 2/6] arm64: Add more test functions to insn.c | From | Pratyush Anand <> |
| |
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 9:33 AM, David Long <dave.long@linaro.org> wrote: > From: "David A. Long" <dave.long@linaro.org> > > Certain instructions are hard to execute correctly out-of-line (as in > kprobes). Test functions are added to insn.[hc] to identify these. The > instructions include any that use PC-relative addressing, change the PC, > or change interrupt masking. For efficiency and simplicity test > functions are also added for small collections of related instructions. > > Signed-off-by: David A. Long <dave.long@linaro.org> > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/insn.h | 21 +++++++++++++++++++-- > arch/arm64/kernel/insn.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/insn.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/insn.h > index e2ff32a..466afd4 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/insn.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/insn.h > @@ -223,8 +223,13 @@ static __always_inline bool aarch64_insn_is_##abbr(u32 code) \ > static __always_inline u32 aarch64_insn_get_##abbr##_value(void) \ > { return (val); } > > +__AARCH64_INSN_FUNCS(adr, 0x9F000000, 0x10000000)
Should n't it be __AARCH64_INSN_FUNCS(adr_adrp, 0x1F000000, 0x10000000)
So, that it also take care about adrp
> +__AARCH64_INSN_FUNCS(prfm_lit, 0xFF000000, 0xD8000000)
[...]
> > +bool aarch64_insn_uses_literal(u32 insn) > +{ > + /* ldr/ldrsw (literal), prfm */ > + > + return aarch64_insn_is_ldr_lit(insn) || > + aarch64_insn_is_ldrsw_lit(insn) ||
also aarch64_insn_is_adr_adrp(insn) ||
> + aarch64_insn_is_prfm_lit(insn); > +} > + > +bool aarch64_insn_is_branch(u32 insn) > +{ > + /* b, bl, cb*, tb*, b.cond, br, blr */ > + > + return aarch64_insn_is_b_bl_cb_tb(insn) || > + aarch64_insn_is_br_blr(insn) ||
also aarch64_insn_is_ret(insn) ||
> + aarch64_insn_is_bcond(insn); > +} > + > /*
| |