On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 09:53:38PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 10:09:21AM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 03:29:33PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > > SNIP > > > > > Which is where we cope with the possibility that we couldn't emulate the > > > instruction that hit the breakpoint. Seems that is not an issue on x86, > > > or it's handled elsewhere? > > > > > > We should fix emulate_step() if it failed to emulate something it > > > should have, but there will always be the possibility that it fails. > > > > > > Instead of calling perf_event_disable() we could just add a flag to > > > arch_hw_breakpoint that says we hit an error on the event, and block > > > reinstalling it in arch_install_hw_breakpoint(). > > > > ok, might be easier.. I'll check on that > > so staring on that I think disabling is the right way here.. > > we need the event to be unscheduled and not scheduled back > again, I don't see better way at the moment
OK, can you resend the patch with updated Changelog that explains these things?
