All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>
Cc: Abhishek Sagar <sagar.abhishek@gmail.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	jkenisto@us.ibm.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3][RFC] x86: Catch stray non-kprobe breakpoints
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:37:13 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080130040712.GA6762@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <479F7EA5.5040201@redhat.com>

On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 02:29:41PM -0500, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Abhishek Sagar wrote:
> > On 1/29/08, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> In that case, why don't you just reduce the priority of kprobe_exceptions_nb?
> >> Then, the execution path becomes very simple.
> > 
> > Ananth mentioned that the kprobe notifier has to be the first to run.
> 
> (Hmm.. I think he has just explained current implementation:))
> IMHO, since kprobes itself can not know what the external debugger
> wants to do, the highest priority should be reserved for those external tools.

The reason why kprobes needs to be the first to run is simple: it
doesn't need user intervention and if it isn't the intended recepient of
the breakpoint, it just lets the kernel take over (unlike a debugger,
which would potentially need user attention). Also, if the underlying
instruction itself is a breakpoint, we have the facility in kprobes to
single-step inline so the kernel can take control and notify any other
intended recepient of the underlying breakpoint.

As such, I believe the current situation is fine, has worked fine for
close to 4 years now and doesn't warrant any change.

Ananth

      reply	other threads:[~2008-01-30  4:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-01-27  9:08 [PATCH 0/3][RFC] x86: Catch stray non-kprobe breakpoints Abhishek Sagar
2008-01-29  6:02 ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2008-01-29 10:40   ` Abhishek Sagar
2008-01-29 13:18     ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2008-01-29 17:24       ` Abhishek Sagar
2008-01-29 15:13     ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-01-29 18:08       ` Abhishek Sagar
2008-01-29 19:29         ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-01-30  4:07           ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli [this message]

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=20080130040712.GA6762@in.ibm.com \
    --to=ananth@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=jkenisto@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mhiramat@redhat.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=sagar.abhishek@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.