On 2013/9/15 0:49, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 09/13/13 20:49, Xishi Qiu wrote: > >> diff --git a/Documentation/kprobes.txt b/Documentation/kprobes.txt >> index 0cfb00f..ca278d5 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/kprobes.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/kprobes.txt >> @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ stack contents as the probed function. When it is done, the handler >> calls jprobe_return(), which traps again to restore the original stack >> contents and processor state and switch to the probed function. >> >> -By convention, the callee owns its arguments, so gcc may produce code > > Are you sure about that? > It looks correct to me (before the patch). > Hi Randy, you are right, I confused caller and callee. Thanks, Xishi Qiu >> +By convention, the caller owns its arguments, so gcc may produce code >> that unexpectedly modifies that portion of the stack. This is why >> Kprobes saves a copy of the stack and restores it after the jprobe >> handler has run. Up to MAX_STACK_SIZE bytes are copied -- e.g., >> > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
