public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
Cc: "Deng, Dongdong" <dongdong.deng@windriver.com>,
	will.deacon@arm.com, lethal@linux-sh.org,
	mahesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com, prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, mingo@elte.hu,
	kgdb-bugreport@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] hw-breakpoints, kgdb, x86: add a flag to passDIE_DEBUG notification
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 16:07:48 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100723140745.GB5255@nowhere> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C4996FA.2010301@windriver.com>

On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 08:19:54AM -0500, Jason Wessel wrote:
> On 07/23/2010 08:04 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 10:16:01AM +0800, Dongdong Deng wrote:
> >   
> >> The hw_breakpoint subsystem consumes all the hardware
> >> breakpoint exceptions since it hooks the notify_die
> >> handlers first, this means that kgdb doesn't get the
> >> opportunity to handle hw breakpoint exceptions generated
> >> by kgdb itself.
> >>
> >> This patch adds an extend flag to perf_event_attr for
> >> hw_breakpoint_handler() to decide to pass or stop the
> >> DIE_DEBUG notification.
> >>
> >> As KGDB set that flag, hw_breakpoint_handler() will pass
> >> the DIE_DEBUG notification, thus kgdb have the chance
> >> to take DIE_DEBUG notification.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Dongdong Deng <dongdong.deng@windriver.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@windriver.com>
> >> ---
> >>  arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c |   14 ++++++++++++++
> >>  arch/x86/kernel/kgdb.c          |    2 ++
> >>  include/linux/perf_event.h      |    9 +++++++++
> >>  3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c b/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> >> index a8f1b80..b38f786 100644
> >> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> >> @@ -406,6 +406,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(hw_breakpoint_restore);
> >>   * ii) When there are more bits than trap<n> set in DR6 register (such
> >>   * as BD, BS or BT) indicating that more than one debug condition is
> >>   * met and requires some more action in do_debug().
> >> + * iii) The source of hw breakpoint event want to handle the event
> >> + * by itself, currently just KGDB have this notion.
> >>   *
> >>   * NOTIFY_STOP returned for all other cases
> >>   *
> >> @@ -464,6 +466,18 @@ static int __kprobes hw_breakpoint_handler(struct die_args *args)
> >>  			break;
> >>  		}
> >>  
> >> +		if (bp->attr.flag == SKIP_HWBP_EVENT_PERF_FLAG) {
> >> +			/*
> >> +			 * when attr.flag is set to SKIP_HWBP_EVENT_PERF_FLAG
> >> +			 * it indicates currently hw breakpoint event
> >> +			 * source want to handle this event by itself.
> >> +			 * thus return NOTIFY_DONE here.
> >> +			 */
> >> +			rc = NOTIFY_DONE;
> >> +			rcu_read_unlock();
> >> +			break;
> >> +		}
> >> +
> >>     
> >
> >
> >
> > No. We really shouldn't make a user ABI change (adding attr.flag) just
> > to solve an in-kernel-only problem.
> >
> > And moreover we probably don't need flags at all. Why not just turning kgdb handler
> > into a higher priority?
> >
> > I don't even remember why kgdb has its own handler instead of using the
> > struct perf_event:overflow_handler. May be that's because of the early breakpoints.
> >
> >   
> 
> 
> The patch may or may not be the right way to solve the problem.   It is
> worth noting that early breakpoints are handled separately with a direct
> writes to the debug registers so this API does not apply.



But you still need to handle them on the debug exception, right?


 
> This patch effectively causes the events to get passed to the normal
> handlers.
> 
> The source of the original problem (which was merged in 2.6.35) is
> commit: 018cbffe6819f6f8db20a0a3acd9bab9bfd667e4 -     Merge commit
> 'v2.6.33' into perf/core
> 
> Specifically this line right here:
> @@@ -502,6 -486,8 +486,6 @@@ static int __kprobes hw_breakpoint_hand
>           rcu_read_lock();
>  
>           bp = per_cpu(bp_per_reg[i], cpu);
>  -        if (bp)
>  -            rc = NOTIFY_DONE;
> 
> Because the NOTIFY_DONE is never set, a default value of NOTIFY_STOP is
> passed at the end and kgdb never gets to see the break point even that
> was never intended for the perf handler in the first place.
> 
> It is not as easy of course to just revert this patch because it changed
> other logic.
> 
> Jason.



Right.

Actually NOTIFY_DONE is returned when there is more work to do: handling
another exception than breakpoint, or sending a signal. Otherwise yeah,
we return NOTIFY_STOP as we assume there is more work to do.

So the following alternatives appear to me:

- Moving the breakpoint exception handling into the
  struct perf_event:overflow_handler. In fact I can't find the breakpoint
  handling in kgdb.c

- Have a higher priority in kgdb notifier (which means decreasing the one
  of hw_breakpoint.c)

- Always returning NOTIFY_DONE from the breakpoint path.


Is this a regression BTW?


  reply	other threads:[~2010-07-23 14:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-07-23  2:16 [RFC PATCH] hw-breakpoints, kgdb, x86: add a flag to pass DIE_DEBUG notification Dongdong Deng
2010-07-23 13:04 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-07-23 13:19   ` [RFC PATCH] hw-breakpoints, kgdb, x86: add a flag to passDIE_DEBUG notification Jason Wessel
2010-07-23 14:07     ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2010-07-23 15:49       ` [RFC PATCH] hw-breakpoints, kgdb, x86: add a flag topassDIE_DEBUG notification Jason Wessel
2010-07-23 16:17         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-07-26 11:13           ` DDD
2010-07-28 17:08             ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-07-28 17:15               ` [RFC PATCH] hw-breakpoints, kgdb, x86: add a flagtopassDIE_DEBUG notification Jason Wessel

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=20100723140745.GB5255@nowhere \
    --to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=dongdong.deng@windriver.com \
    --cc=jason.wessel@windriver.com \
    --cc=kgdb-bugreport@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mahesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.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