On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 04:16:46PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 05:43:17AM +0530, K.Prasad wrote:
> > Introduce PPC64 implementation for the generic hardware breakpoint 
> > interfaces
> > defined in kernel/hw_breakpoint.c. Enable the HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT flag and 
> > the
> > Makefile.
> 
> [snip]
> > +/*
> > + * Handle debug exception notifications.
> > + */
> > +int __kprobes hw_breakpoint_handler(struct die_args *args)
> > +{
> > +   int rc = NOTIFY_STOP;
> > +   struct hw_breakpoint *bp;
> > +   struct pt_regs *regs = args->regs;
> > +   unsigned long dar = regs->dar;
> > +   int cpu, is_kernel, stepped = 1;
> > +
> > +   is_kernel = (hbp_kernel_pos == HBP_NUM) ? 0 : 1;
> > +
> > +   /* Disable breakpoints during exception handling */
> > +   set_dabr(0);
> > +
> > +   cpu = get_cpu();
> > +   /* Determine whether kernel- or user-space address is the trigger */
> > +   bp = is_kernel ?
> > +           per_cpu(this_hbp_kernel[0], cpu) : current->thread.hbp[0];
> > +   /*
> > +    * bp can be NULL due to lazy debug register switching
> > +    * or due to the delay between updates of hbp_kernel_pos
> > +    * and this_hbp_kernel.
> > +    */
> > +   if (!bp)
> > +           goto out;
> > +
> > +   per_cpu(dabr_data, cpu) = is_kernel ? kdabr : current->thread.dabr;
> > +
> > +   /* Verify if dar lies within the address range occupied by the symbol
> > +    * being watched. Since we cannot get the symbol size for
> > +    * user-space requests we skip this check in that case
> > +    */
> > +   if (is_kernel &&
> > +       !((bp->info.address <= dar) &&
> > +        (dar <= (bp->info.address + bp->info.symbolsize))))
> > +           /*
> > +            * This exception is triggered not because of a memory access on
> > +            * the monitored variable but in the double-word address range
> > +            * in which it is contained. We will consume this exception,
> > +            * considering it as 'noise'.
> > +            */
> > +           goto out;
> > +
> > +   (bp->triggered)(bp, regs);
> 
> It bothers me that the trigger function is executed before the
> trapping instruction, but the SIGTRAP occurs afterwards.  Since
> they're both responses to the trap, it seems logical to me that they
> should occur at the same time (from the trapping program's point of
> view, at least).
> 

How about moving the triggered function to the single-step handler code
for both kernel- and user-space?

That would make it behave like a trigger-after-execute (and synchronised
with the signal-delivery timing).

> > +   /*
> > +    * Return early without restoring DABR if the breakpoint is from
> > +    * user-space which always operates in one-shot mode
> > +    */
> > +   if (!is_kernel) {
> > +           rc = NOTIFY_DONE;
> > +           goto out;
> > +   }
> > +
> > +   stepped = emulate_step(regs, regs->nip);
> > +   /*
> > +    * Single-step the causative instruction manually if
> > +    * emulate_step() could not execute it
> > +    */
> > +   if (stepped == 0) {
> > +           regs->msr |= MSR_SE;
> > +           goto out;
> > +   }
> > +   set_dabr(per_cpu(dabr_data, cpu));
> > +
> > +out:
> > +   /* Enable pre-emption only if single-stepping is finished */
> > +   if (stepped) {
> > +           per_cpu(dabr_data, cpu) = 0;
> > +           put_cpu();
> > +   }
> > +   return rc;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Handle single-step exceptions following a DABR hit.
> > + */
> > +int __kprobes single_step_dabr_instruction(struct die_args *args)
> > +{
> > +   struct pt_regs *regs = args->regs;
> > +   int cpu = get_cpu();
> > +   int ret = NOTIFY_DONE;
> > +   siginfo_t info;
> > +   unsigned long this_dabr_data = per_cpu(dabr_data, cpu);
> > +
> > +   /*
> > +    * Check if we are single-stepping as a result of a
> > +    * previous HW Breakpoint exception
> > +    */
> > +   if (this_dabr_data == 0)
> > +           goto out;
> > +
> > +   regs->msr &= ~MSR_SE;
> > +   /* Deliver signal to user-space */
> > +   if (this_dabr_data < TASK_SIZE) {
> > +           info.si_signo = SIGTRAP;
> > +           info.si_errno = 0;
> > +           info.si_code = TRAP_HWBKPT;
> > +           info.si_addr = (void __user *)(per_cpu(dabr_data, cpu));
> > +           force_sig_info(SIGTRAP, &info, current);
> > +   }
> > +
> > +   set_dabr(this_dabr_data);
> > +   per_cpu(dabr_data, cpu) = 0;
> > +   ret = NOTIFY_STOP;
> > +   /*
> > +    * If single-stepped after hw_breakpoint_handler(), pre-emption is
> > +    * already disabled.
> > +    */
> > +   put_cpu();
> > +
> > +out:
> > +   /*
> > +    * A put_cpu() call is required to complement the get_cpu()
> > +    * call used initially
> > +    */
> > +   put_cpu();
> > +   return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Handle debug exception notifications.
> > + */
> > +int __kprobes hw_breakpoint_exceptions_notify(
> 
> Um.. there seems to be a pretty glaring problem here, in that AFAICT
> in this revision of the series, this function is never invoked, and so
> your breakpoint handling code will never be executed.  i.e. the
> changes to do_dabr to connect your code seem to be missing.
>

I realised it only after you pointed out...some remnants from the
previous version have caused it. While the patch should have treated
only ptrace in a special manner (one-shot), it erroneously does it for all
user-space. I will change it in the next version of the patchset.

Thanks,
K.Prasad

_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Reply via email to