Re: [PATCH 1/2] Move the pt_regs_offset struct definition from arch to common include file

[David Long <dave.long@linaro.org>]

On 06/24/15 00:07, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-06-23 at 09:48 -0400, David Long wrote:
>> On 06/22/15 23:32, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2015-06-19 at 10:12 -0400, David Long wrote:
>>>> On 06/19/15 00:19, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 12:42 -0400, David Long wrote:
>>>>>> From: "David A. Long" <dave.long@linaro.org>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The pt_regs_offset structure is used for HAVE_REGS_AND_STACK_ACCESS_API
>>>>>>     feature and has identical definitions in four different arch ptrace.h
>>>>>> include files. It seems unlikely that definition would ever need to be
>>>>>> changed regardless of architecture so lets move it into
>>>>>> include/linux/ptrace.h.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: David A. Long <dave.long@linaro.org>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c | 5 -----
>>>>>
>>>>> Built and booted on powerpc, but is there an easy way to actually test the code
>>>>> paths in question?
>>>>
>>>> There is an easy way to "smoke test" it on all archiectures that also
>>>> implement kprobes (which powerpc does).  If I'm understanding the
>>>> powerpc code correctly (WRT register naming conventions) just do the
>>>> following:
>>>>
>>>> cd /sys/kernel/debug/tracing
>>>> echo 'p do_fork %gpr0' > kprobe_events
>>>> echo 1 > events/kprobes/enable
>>>> ls
>>>> cat trace
>>>> echo 0 > events/kprobes/enable
>>>>
>>>> Every fork() call done on the system between those two echo commands
>>>> (hence the "ls") should append a line to the trace file.  For a more
>>>> exhaustive test one could repeat this sequence for every register in the
>>>> architecture.
>>>
>>> OK, so I went the whole hog and did:
>>>
>>> $ echo 'p do_fork %gpr0 %gpr1 %gpr2 %gpr3 %gpr4 %gpr5 %gpr6 %gpr7 %gpr8 %gpr9 %gpr10 %gpr11 %gpr12 %gpr13 %gpr14 %gpr15 %gpr16 %gpr17 %gpr18 %gpr19 %gpr20 %gpr21 %gpr22 %gpr23 %gpr24 %gpr25 %gpr26 %gpr27 %gpr28 %gpr29 %gpr30 %gpr31 %nip %msr %ctr %link %xer %ccr %softe %trap %dar %dsisr' > kprobe_events
>>>
>>> And I get:
>>>
>>>               bash-2057  [001] d...   535.433941: p_do_fork_0: (do_fork+0x8/0x490) arg1=0xc0000000000094d0 arg2=0xc0000001fbe9be30 arg3=0xc000000001133bb8 arg4=0x1200011 arg5=0x0 arg6=0x0 arg7=0x0 arg8=0x3fff7c885940 arg9=0x1 arg10=0xc0000001fbe9bea0 arg11=0x0 arg12=0xc01 arg13=0xc0000000000094c8 arg14=0xc00000000fdc0480 arg15=0x0 arg16=0x22000000 arg17=0x1016d6e8 arg18=0x0 arg19=0x44000000 arg20=0x0 arg21=0x10037c82208 arg22=0x1017b008 arg23=0x10143d18 arg24=0x10178854 arg25=0x10144f90 arg26=0x10037c821e8 arg27=0x0 arg28=0x0 arg29=0x0 arg30=0x0 arg31=0x809 arg32=0x3ffff788c010 arg33=0xc0000000000a7fe8 arg34=0x8000000000029033 arg35=0xc0000000000094c8 arg36=0xc0000000000094d0 arg37=0x0 arg38=0x42222844 arg39=0x1 arg40=0x700 arg41=0xc0000001fbe9bd50 arg42=0xc0000001fbe9bd30
>>>
>>> Which is ugly as hell, but appears unchanged since before your patch.
>>>
>>
>> Excellent.  Many thanks.
>
> No worries.
>
> Did I already send you an ack? Have another one in case:
>
> Acked-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
>
>

Thanks.

>>> I take it it's expected that the names are not decoded in the output?
>>
>> Yes.
>
> In fact I don't see anywhere that uses the reverse decoding, ie.
> regs_query_register_name().
>

Neither did I.  I assumed it was intended to support either future 
kernel code or custom debug modules.

> cheers
>
>

-dl