On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 10:13:48AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 10:06:51PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > > > > Jiri, we could also have an option to support 64-bit call, right? We'd > > > > need nop9 for that, but it's an option as well to future-proofing this > > > > approach, no? > > > > > > hm, I don't think there's call with relative 64bit offset > > > > why do you need a relative, when you have 64 bits? ;) there is a call > > to absolute address, no? > > No, there is not :/ You get to use an indirect call, which means > multiple instructions and all the speculation joy. > > IFF USDT thingies have AX clobbered (I couldn't find in a hurry) then > patching the multi instruction thing is relatively straight forward, if > they don't, its going to be a pain. I don't follow, what's the reason for that? jirka
