From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <systemtap-return-17821-listarch-systemtap=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 29198 invoked by alias); 19 Apr 2011 13:29:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 29190 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Apr 2011 13:29:29 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com (HELO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com) (71.74.56.122)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:29:13 +0000
X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=aqMe+0lCtaYvy4h0jyaoPGyq+DPF+P6rPG2xbekoY9Q= c=1 sm=0 a=1QQH6BUniP4A:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=OPBmh+XkhLl+Enan7BmTLg==:17 a=owHtBCBMGy2idkNl1-sA:9 a=5cPSLGuINJWaWo-Cx0UA:7 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=OPBmh+XkhLl+Enan7BmTLg==:117
Received: from [67.242.120.143] ([67.242.120.143:56794] helo=[192.168.23.10])	by hrndva-oedge01.mail.rr.com (envelope-from <rostedt@goodmis.org>)	(ecelerity 2.2.3.46 r()) with ESMTP	id 2A/81-20102-72E8DAD4; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:29:12 +0000
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2.6.39-rc1-tip 7/26]  7: x86: analyze instruction and determine fixups.
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,  Linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@infradead.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,  Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, SystemTap <systemtap@sources.redhat.com>,  Jim Keniston <jkenisto@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com>, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20110401143348.15455.68644.sendpatchset@localhost6.localdomain6>
References:	 <20110401143223.15455.19844.sendpatchset@localhost6.localdomain6>	 <20110401143348.15455.68644.sendpatchset@localhost6.localdomain6>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15"
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:29:00 -0000
Message-ID: <1303219751.7181.101.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact systemtap-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <systemtap.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:systemtap-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Post: <mailto:systemtap@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:systemtap-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faqs>
Sender: systemtap-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-q2/txt/msg00113.txt.bz2

On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 20:03 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:

> +
> +static void report_bad_prefix(void)
> +{
> +	printk(KERN_ERR "uprobes does not currently support probing "
> +		"instructions with any of the following prefixes: "
> +		"cs:, ds:, es:, ss:, lock:\n");
> +}
> +
> +static void report_bad_1byte_opcode(int mode, uprobe_opcode_t op)
> +{
> +	printk(KERN_ERR "In %d-bit apps, "
> +		"uprobes does not currently support probing "
> +		"instructions whose first byte is 0x%2.2x\n", mode, op);
> +}
> +
> +static void report_bad_2byte_opcode(uprobe_opcode_t op)
> +{
> +	printk(KERN_ERR "uprobes does not currently support probing "
> +		"instructions with the 2-byte opcode 0x0f 0x%2.2x\n", op);
> +}

Should these really be KERN_ERR, or is KERN_WARNING a better fit?

Also, can a non-privileged user cause these printks to spam the console
and cause a DoS to the system?

-- Steve