[RFC Patch 2/6] Introduce PPC64 specific Hardware Breakpointinterfaces
K.Prasad
prasad at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Thu May 21 17:15:05 EST 2009
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
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list