linux-arch.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
To: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
	libc-alpha@sourceware.org,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@arm.com>,
	gdb@sourceware.org,
	Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>,
	Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Alan Hayward <alan.hayward@arm.com>,
	Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>,
	Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 08/10] arm64/sve: ptrace: Wire up vector length control and reporting
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 10:03:51 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170117100349.GR3699@e103592.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170116151156.GI28060@E107787-LIN>

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 03:11:56PM +0000, Yao Qi wrote:
> On 17-01-16 13:32:31, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 12:20:38PM +0000, Yao Qi wrote:
> > > On 17-01-12 11:26:07, Dave Martin wrote:
> > > > This patch adds support for manipulating a task's vector length at
> > > > runtime via ptrace.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > I hope kernel doesn't provide such interface to ptracer to change vector
> > > length.
> > 
> > It does, with this patch, beacuse...
> > 
> > > The vector length is sort of a read-only property of thread/process/
> > > program to debugger, unless we really have a clear requirement to modify
> > > vector length in debugging.  I may miss something because I haven't debug
> > > SVE code yet.
> > 
> > ...the vector length is no longer read-only for the task, thanks to
> > the new prctls().
> 
> What I meant "read-only" is that debugger can't change it, while the program
> itself can change it via prctl().

I see.

> > 
> > This does add complexity, but I figured that any programmer's model
> > state that the thread can modify for itself should be modifiable by the
> > debugger, if for no other reason than the user may want to experiment to
> > see what happens.  Without a ptrace interface, it would be necessary
> > to inject a prctl() call into the target, which is possible but awkward.
> 
> We only need such interface if it is useful, see more below.
> 
> Suppose it is useful to change vector length through ptrace, we should align
> ptrace interface to prctl() as much as possible.  Looks that both prctl
> change and ptrace change can go through sve_set_vector_length, easy to keep
> two consistent.
> 
> > 
> > gdb must already re-detect the vector length on stop, since the target
> > could have called the prctl() in the meantime.
> 
> Yes, gdb assumes the vector length may be changed, so it re-detects on
> every stop, but I don't see the need for gdb to change the vector length.
> 
> > 
> > Access via ptrace also allows things like trapping on exec, fork or
> > clone and changing the vector length for the new process or thread
> > before it starts to run.  I'm guessing here, but such a scenario seems
> > legitimate (?)
> > 
> 
> Yes, these cases are valid, but the usefulness is still questionable to
> me.  I just doubt that SVE developers do need to change vector length
> when they are debugging code.  Note that it is not my strong objection
> to this patch, if kernel people believe this is useful, I am fine with
> it.

That's fair.  I'll leave the patch there for now and see if anyone else
has a comment to make, but it could be removed without affecting
anything else.

Are there situations in which injecting a function call into the target
won't work, i.e., where we couldn't do:

set prctl(...)

?

Using the prctl interface this way, it would also be preferable to refer
to the #defines by name.

Cheers
---Dave

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-01-17 10:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-12 11:25 [RFC PATCH 00/10] arm64/sve: Add userspace vector length control API Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:25 ` Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:26 ` [RFC PATCH 01/10] prctl: Add skeleton for PR_SVE_{SET,GET}_VL controls Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:26   ` Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:26 ` [RFC PATCH 02/10] arm64/sve: Track vector length for each task Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:26   ` Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:26 ` [RFC PATCH 03/10] arm64/sve: Set CPU vector length to match current task Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:26   ` Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:26 ` [RFC PATCH 04/10] arm64/sve: Factor out clearing of tasks' SVE regs Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:26   ` Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:26 ` [RFC PATCH 05/10] arm64/sve: Wire up vector length control prctl() calls Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:26 ` [RFC PATCH 06/10] arm64/sve: Disallow VL setting for individual threads by default Dave Martin
2017-01-16 11:34   ` Yao Qi
2017-01-16 11:34     ` Yao Qi
2017-01-16 12:23     ` Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:26 ` [RFC PATCH 07/10] arm64/sve: Add vector length inheritance control Dave Martin
2017-01-16 12:27   ` Yao Qi
2017-01-16 13:34     ` Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:26 ` [RFC PATCH 08/10] arm64/sve: ptrace: Wire up vector length control and reporting Dave Martin
2017-01-16 12:20   ` Yao Qi
2017-01-16 12:20     ` Yao Qi
2017-01-16 13:32     ` Dave Martin
2017-01-16 15:11       ` Yao Qi
2017-01-16 15:11         ` Yao Qi
2017-01-16 15:47         ` Pedro Alves
2017-01-16 16:31           ` Dave Martin
2017-01-16 16:31             ` Dave Martin
2017-01-17 10:03         ` Dave Martin [this message]
2017-01-17 10:03           ` Dave Martin
2017-01-17 13:31           ` Alan Hayward
2017-01-19 17:11             ` Dave Martin
2017-01-19 17:11               ` Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:26 ` [RFC PATCH 09/10] arm64/sve: Enable default vector length control via procfs Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:26 ` [RFC PATCH 10/10] Revert "arm64/sve: Limit vector length to 512 bits by default" Dave Martin
2017-01-12 11:26   ` Dave Martin

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=20170117100349.GR3699@e103592.cambridge.arm.com \
    --to=dave.martin@arm.com \
    --cc=Marc.Zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=alan.hayward@arm.com \
    --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
    --cc=christoffer.dall@linaro.org \
    --cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
    --cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=qiyaoltc@gmail.com \
    --cc=szabolcs.nagy@arm.com \
    --cc=triegel@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).