From: Luis Machado <luisgpm@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Cc: ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] 4xx hardware watchpoint support
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 15:06:14 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1211565974.15367.7.camel@gargoyle> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18484.60888.981390.893747@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 13:51 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Luis Machado writes:
>
> > This is a patch that has been sitting idle for quite some time. I
> > decided to move it further because it is something useful. It was
> > originally written by Michel Darneille, based off of 2.6.16.
> >
> > The original patch, though, was not compatible with the current DABR
> > logic. DABR's are used to implement hardware watchpoint support for
> > ppc64 processors (i.e. 970, Power5 etc). 4xx's have a different
> > debugging register layout and needs to be handled differently (they two
> > registers: DAC and DBCR0).
>
> Yes, they are different, but they do essentially the same thing, so I
> think we should try and unify the handling of the two. Maybe you
> could rename set_dabr() to set_hw_watchpoint() or something and make
> it set DABR on 64-bit and "classic" 32-bit processors, and DAC on
> 4xx/Book E processors.
>
> Likewise, I don't think we need both a "dabr" field and a "dac" field
> in the thread_struct - one should do. Rename "dabr" to something else
> if you feel that the "dabr" name is too ppc64-specific. And I don't
> think we need both __debugger_dabr_match and __debugger_dac_match.
>
Thanks for the feedback Paul. I'll try consolidating those mechanisms
into a single, more general scheme.
Best regards,
Luis
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-23 18:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-21 17:39 [RFC] 4xx hardware watchpoint support Luis Machado
2008-05-21 21:16 ` Kumar Gala
2008-05-21 21:54 ` Luis Machado
2008-05-22 3:51 ` Paul Mackerras
2008-05-22 6:46 ` Roland McGrath
2008-05-23 18:12 ` Luis Machado
2008-05-27 21:34 ` Roland McGrath
2008-05-23 18:06 ` Luis Machado [this message]
2008-06-20 20:14 ` Luis Machado
2008-06-30 19:16 ` Luis Machado
2008-07-19 13:37 ` Josh Boyer
2008-07-21 16:36 ` Luis Machado
2008-07-21 17:05 ` Josh Boyer
2008-07-23 1:47 ` Luis Machado
2008-07-23 12:51 ` Kumar Gala
2008-07-23 14:23 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-07-23 14:42 ` Luis Machado
2008-07-23 15:53 ` Josh Boyer
2008-07-23 16:10 ` Luis Machado
2008-07-25 4:00 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-07-25 15:23 ` Kumar Gala
2008-07-25 19:38 ` Kumar Gala
2008-07-25 21:38 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-07-25 23:08 ` Josh Boyer
2008-07-25 23:18 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-07-25 21:37 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-07-25 15:22 ` Kumar Gala
2008-07-23 16:26 ` Kumar Gala
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=1211565974.15367.7.camel@gargoyle \
--to=luisgpm@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
/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).