public inbox for linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "K.Prasad" <prasad@linux•vnet.ibm.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland•harvard.edu>
Cc: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling•org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@au1•ibm.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@ozlabs•org, paulus@samba•org,
	Roland McGrath <roland@redhat•com>
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch 2/6] Introduce PPC64 specific Hardware Breakpointinterfaces
Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 12:45:05 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090521071505.GB9344@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0905181227180.3136-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>

On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 12:30:41PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 18 May 2009, K.Prasad wrote:
> 
> > > > > > +int __kprobes hw_breakpoint_handler(struct die_args *args)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > +	int rc = NOTIFY_STOP;
> > > > > > +	struct hw_breakpoint *bp;
> > > > > > +	struct pt_regs *regs = args->regs;
> > > > > > +	unsigned long dar;
> > > > > > +	int cpu, stepped, is_kernel;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +	/* Disable breakpoints during exception handling */
> > > > > > +	set_dabr(0);
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +	dar = regs->dar & (~HW_BREAKPOINT_ALIGN);
> > > > > > +	is_kernel = (dar >= TASK_SIZE) ? 1 : 0;
> > > > > 
> > > > > is_kernel_addr() ?
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Ok.
> > > 
> > > Shouldn't this test hbp_kernel_pos instead?
> > > 
> > 
> > Testing hbp_kernel_pos should be sufficient for PPC64 with just one
> > breakpoint register. However the above code is more extensible to other
> > PowerPC implementations which have more than one breakpoint register.
> 
> Then maybe you don't want to test this at all.  Just compare the dar 
> value with each of the breakpoint addresses.  That's more like what the 
> x86 code does.
> 
> Alan Stern
>

Comparing the DAR register value with each breakpoint address is
required to determine if the exception is the cause of a breakpoint hit
and I've added the code to hw_breakpoint_handler(). With this check in
place, I find that using hbp_kernel_pos to determine kernel/user space
origin is much easier (as you suggested) and the code is modified
accordingly.

Please find the changes in the new patchset being sent.

Thanks,
K.Prasad

  reply	other threads:[~2009-05-21  7:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20090514133312.360702378@prasadkr_t60p.in.ibm.com>
2009-05-14 13:43 ` [RFC Patch 1/6] Prepare the PowerPC platform for HW Breakpoint infrastructure K.Prasad
2009-05-18  3:35   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2009-05-18 16:15     ` K.Prasad
2009-05-14 13:44 ` [RFC Patch 2/6] Introduce PPC64 specific Hardware Breakpoint interfaces K.Prasad
2009-05-14 14:50   ` Michael Ellerman
2009-05-14 19:50     ` [RFC Patch 2/6] Introduce PPC64 specific Hardware Breakpointinterfaces K.Prasad
2009-05-14 20:20       ` Alan Stern
2009-05-18 16:10         ` K.Prasad
2009-05-18 16:30           ` Alan Stern
2009-05-21  7:15             ` K.Prasad [this message]
2009-05-14 13:45 ` [RFC Patch 3/6] Modify ptrace code to use Hardware Breakpoint interfaces K.Prasad
2009-05-14 13:45 ` [RFC Patch 4/6] Modify process handling code to handle hardware debug registers K.Prasad
2009-05-14 14:54   ` Michael Ellerman
2009-05-14 13:45 ` [RFC Patch 5/6] Modify Data storage exception code to recognise DABR match first K.Prasad
2009-05-14 13:46 ` [RFC Patch 6/6] Adapt kexec and samples code to recognise PPC64 hardware breakpoint usage K.Prasad
2009-05-14 13:59   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2009-05-14 14:11     ` Michael Ellerman
2009-05-14 14:18       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2009-05-14 14:55         ` Michael Ellerman
2009-05-14 19:15     ` [RFC Patch 6/6] Adapt kexec and samples code to recognise PPC64hardware " K.Prasad
2009-05-14 20:21   ` [RFC Patch 6/6] Adapt kexec and samples code to recognise PPC64 hardware " Alan Stern
2009-05-18 16:11     ` [RFC Patch 6/6] Adapt kexec and samples code to recognise PPC64hardware " K.Prasad

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090521071505.GB9344@in.ibm.com \
    --to=prasad@linux$(echo .)vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=benh@au1$(echo .)ibm.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs$(echo .)org \
    --cc=mikey@neuling$(echo .)org \
    --cc=paulus@samba$(echo .)org \
    --cc=roland@redhat$(echo .)com \
    --cc=stern@rowland$(echo .)harvard.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox