From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Zyngier Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] arm64: KVM: debug infrastructure support Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 11:11:38 +0100 Message-ID: <5385B65A.9000803@arm.com> References: <1400604945-25247-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <20140525153421.GA3866@lvm> <5385B2DD.8090200@arm.com> <20140528095833.GO16428@lvm> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , Will Deacon , Catalin Marinas , Ian Campbell , Anup Patel , Peter Maydell To: Christoffer Dall Return-path: Received: from fw-tnat.austin.arm.com ([217.140.110.23]:51404 "EHLO collaborate-mta1.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751749AbaE1KLv (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 May 2014 06:11:51 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20140528095833.GO16428@lvm> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 28/05/14 10:58, Christoffer Dall wrote: > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:56:45AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> On 25/05/14 16:34, Christoffer Dall wrote: >>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 05:55:36PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>>> This patch series adds debug support, a key feature missing from the >>>> KVM/arm64 port. >>>> >>>> The main idea is to keep track of whether the debug registers are >>>> "dirty" (changed by the guest) or not. In this case, perform the usual >>>> save/restore dance, for one run only. It means we only have a penalty >>>> if a guest is actively using the debug registers. >>>> >>>> The amount of registers is properly frightening, but CPUs actually >>>> only implement a subset of them. Also, there is a number of registers >>>> we don't bother emulating (things having to do with external debug and >>>> OSlock). >>> >>> What is the rationale about not having to deal with external debug and >>> OSlock? >> >> External debug is when you actually plug a physical JTAG into the CPU. >> OSlock is a way to prevent "other software" to play with the debug >> registers. My understanding is that it is only useful in combination >> with the external debug. >> >> In both case, implementing support for this is probably not worth the >> effort, at least for the time being. >> > OK, can we document that somewhere clearly in the code then so we know > how we can simply ignore those registers? Sure. I'll add some documentation. Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...