From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>
To: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, "K.Prasad" <prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: powerpc: remove resume_execution() in kprobes
Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 10:49:20 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100528051919.GC25946@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100528020556.GA10586@brick.ozlabs.ibm.com>
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 12:05:56PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 07:42:03PM +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
>
> > While we are at it, can we also add nop to the list of emulated
> > instructions?
>
> I have a patch in development that emulates most of the arithmetic,
> logical and shift/rotate instructions, including ori.
OK.
> While you're here (in a virtual sense at least :), could you explain
> what's going on with the emulate_step() call in resume_execution() in
> arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c? It looks like, having decided that
> emulate_step() can't handle the instruction, you single-step the
> instruction out of line and then call emulate_step again on the same
> instruction, in resume_execution(). Why on earth is it trying to
> emulate the instruction when it has already been executed at this
> point? Is there any reason why we can't just remove the emulate_step
> call from resume_execution()?
You are right. We needed emulate_step() in resume_execution() before we
had the code to handle the emulation in kprobe_handler() at the time of
the breakpoint it. At the time we needed it mainly to ensure branch
targets are reflected correctly in regs->nip if the stepped instruction
was a branch.
However, we now don't get to post_kprobe_handler() at all if
emulate_step() returned 1 at the time of the breakpoint hit. It suffices
if we just fixup the nip here. Patch below. Tested for various
instructions that can and can't be emulated...
---
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>
emulate_step() in kprobe_handler() would've already determined if the
probed instruction can be emulated. We single-step in hardware only if
the instruction couldn't be emulated. resume_execution() therefore is
superfluous -- all we need is to fix up the instruction pointer after
single-stepping.
Thanks to Paul Mackerras for catching this.
Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c | 14 ++------------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.34/arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.34.orig/arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c
+++ linux-2.6.34/arch/powerpc/kernel/kprobes.c
@@ -375,17 +375,6 @@ static int __kprobes trampoline_probe_ha
* single-stepped a copy of the instruction. The address of this
* copy is p->ainsn.insn.
*/
-static void __kprobes resume_execution(struct kprobe *p, struct pt_regs *regs)
-{
- int ret;
- unsigned int insn = *p->ainsn.insn;
-
- regs->nip = (unsigned long)p->addr;
- ret = emulate_step(regs, insn);
- if (ret == 0)
- regs->nip = (unsigned long)p->addr + 4;
-}
-
static int __kprobes post_kprobe_handler(struct pt_regs *regs)
{
struct kprobe *cur = kprobe_running();
@@ -403,7 +392,8 @@ static int __kprobes post_kprobe_handler
cur->post_handler(cur, regs, 0);
}
- resume_execution(cur, regs);
+ /* Adjust nip to after the single-stepped instruction */
+ regs->nip = (unsigned long)cur->addr + 4;
regs->msr |= kcb->kprobe_saved_msr;
/*Restore back the original saved kprobes variables and continue. */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-28 5:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-20 12:49 [RFC PATCH] powerpc: Emulate most load and store instructions in emulate_step() Paul Mackerras
2010-05-21 16:35 ` Milton Miller
2010-05-27 14:12 ` [RFC PATCH] powerpc: Emulate nop too Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2010-05-27 20:22 ` Kumar Gala
2010-05-28 3:52 ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2010-05-28 2:05 ` Paul Mackerras
2010-05-28 5:19 ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli [this message]
2010-05-28 2:28 ` Michael Neuling
2010-05-28 4:16 ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2010-05-28 4:23 ` Michael Neuling
2010-05-28 5:54 ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2010-06-02 5:25 ` [RFC PATCH] powerpc: Emulate most load and store instructions in emulate_step() K.Prasad
2010-06-02 6:00 ` Paul Mackerras
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=20100528051919.GC25946@in.ibm.com \
--to=ananth@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.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).