From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965451AbeEYOGF (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 May 2018 10:06:05 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:51648 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964922AbeEYOGA (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 May 2018 10:06:00 -0400 Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 16:05:57 +0200 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Michael Ellerman Cc: LKML , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , Joel Fernandes , Peter Zijlstra , Linus Torvalds , Yoshinori Sato , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Catalin Marinas , Chris Zankel , Paul Mackerras , Thomas Gleixner , Will Deacon , Rich Felker , Ingo Molnar , Mark Rutland , Alexander Shishkin , Andy Lutomirski , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Max Filippov Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/12] powerpc: Implement hw_breakpoint_arch_parse() Message-ID: <20180525140556.GD22082@lerouge> References: <1526697950-7091-1-git-send-email-frederic@kernel.org> <1526697950-7091-5-git-send-email-frederic@kernel.org> <87fu2hstf3.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87fu2hstf3.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:01:52PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Frederic Weisbecker writes: > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c > > index 348cac9..fba6527 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c > > @@ -139,30 +139,31 @@ int arch_bp_generic_fields(int type, int *gen_bp_type) > > /* > > * Validate the arch-specific HW Breakpoint register settings > > */ > > -int arch_validate_hwbkpt_settings(struct perf_event *bp) > > +int hw_breakpoint_arch_parse(struct perf_event *bp, > > + struct perf_event_attr *attr, > > + struct arch_hw_breakpoint *hw) > > I think the semantics here are that we are reading from bp/attr and > writing to hw? > > If so would some sprinkling of const on the first two parameters help > make that clearer? I seem to remember there was an issue with that due to the various functions we call that need to be converted to take const as well. I thought I would do it in a seperate series but actually it should be no big deal to do it on this one. Let me try that and respin. > > /* > > * Since breakpoint length can be a maximum of HW_BREAKPOINT_LEN(8) > > @@ -176,12 +177,12 @@ int arch_validate_hwbkpt_settings(struct perf_event *bp) > > if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_DAWR)) { > > length_max = 512 ; /* 64 doublewords */ > > /* DAWR region can't cross 512 boundary */ > > - if ((bp->attr.bp_addr >> 10) != > > - ((bp->attr.bp_addr + bp->attr.bp_len - 1) >> 10)) > > + if ((attr->bp_addr >> 10) != > > + ((attr->bp_addr + attr->bp_len - 1) >> 10)) > > return -EINVAL; > > This will conflict with my next branch, but it should be easy enough to > resolve. Ok. > > > } > > - if (info->len > > > - (length_max - (info->address & HW_BREAKPOINT_ALIGN))) > > + if (hw->len > > > + (length_max - (hw->address & HW_BREAKPOINT_ALIGN))) > > return -EINVAL; > > return 0; > > } > > Acked-by: Michael Ellerman Thanks!