Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 7 Feb 2023 17:05:27 +0100 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86/alternative: Support relocations in alternatives |
| |
On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 02:38:13PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > +static void __init_or_module noinline > > +apply_relocation(u8 *buf, size_t len, u8 *dest, u8 *src, size_t src_len) > > +{ > > + for (int next, i = 0; i < len; len = next) { > > 'len = next'? I guess it suppose to be 'i = next', right? Otherwise it > hangs for me. >
Yeah, last minute changes and not testing :/ Sorry about that. I'll try and post an actually tested patch later today.
Also, Masami, how difficuly would it be to do insn_is_nop() that matches most/all conventional NOP instructions?
That might make it more convenient to write a more generic optimize_nops_range() -- it currently needs a single byte nop range and one of the bugs in the patch as posted is caused by a multi-byte nop (specifically a 0x66 prefixed 0x90).
| |