In message <4b2b0ebf.5040...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> you wrote:
> Michael Neuling wrote:
> > In message <4b29ee5f.9020...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> you wrote:
> >> Hi Michael,
> >>
> >> Michael Neuling wrote:
> >>>> + * regs_get_argument_nth() - get Nth argument at function call
> >>>> + * @regs: pt_regs which contains registers at function entry.
> >>>> + * @n: argument number.
> >>>> + *
> >>>> + * regs_get_argument_nth() returns @n th argument of a function call.
> >>>> + * Since usually the kernel stack will be changed right after function
en
> > try
> >>> ,
> >>>> + * you must use this at function entry. If the @n th entry is NOT in th
e
> >>>> + * kernel stack or pt_regs, this returns 0.
> >>>> + */
> >>>> +unsigned long regs_get_argument_nth(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned int
n)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + if (n < ARRAY_SIZE(arg_offs_table))
> >>>> + return *(unsigned long *)((char *)regs + arg_offs_table
[n]);
> >>>> + else {
> >>>> + /*
> >>>> + * If more arguments are passed that can be stored in
> >>>> + * registers, the remaining arguments are stored in the
> >>>> + * parameter save area located at fixed offset from sta
ck
> >>>> + * pointer.
> >>>> + * Following the PowerPC ABI, the first few arguments a
re
> >>>> + * actually passed in registers (r3-r10), with equivale
nt space
> >>>> + * left unused in the parameter save area.
> >>>> + */
> >>>> + n += (PARAMETER_SAVE_AREA_OFFSET / sizeof(unsigned long
));
> >>>> + return regs_get_kernel_stack_nth(regs, n);
> >>> How do we handle FP args?
> >> Currently this patch does not support FP args.
> >
> > This might be OK. I don't think we use floating point parameters in any
> > function definitions in the kernel.
> >
> > We do use altivec in the raid6 driver (drivers/md/raid6altivec.uc) but
> > they are static inline, so they probably don't even end up as
> > functions.
> >
> > I guess we need to make sure that we're not limiting the interface in
> > such a way that we can't support it later if the above changes.
> >
> > regs_get_argument_nth returns an unsigned long which makes returning a
> > 128 bit VMX register impossible. This might be a show stopper for me.
> > How are the x86 guys dealing with this?
> >
> Nope, x86 does not deal with bigger registers (Masami, correct me if I
> am wrong). The return data type is opaque to user. Hence this enables us
> to handle any such situations in future without effecting user space API.
How is it opaque? It's an unsigned long? Is this function different to
what is presented to userspace?
Mikey
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +/*
> >>>> * does not yet catch signals sent when the child dies.
> >>>> * in exit.c or in signal.c.
> >>>> */
> >>>> Index: linux-2.6-tip/kernel/trace/Kconfig
> >>>> ===================================================================
> >>>> --- linux-2.6-tip.orig/kernel/trace/Kconfig
> >>>> +++ linux-2.6-tip/kernel/trace/Kconfig
> >>>> @@ -464,7 +464,7 @@ config BLK_DEV_IO_TRACE
> >>>>
> >>>> config KPROBE_EVENT
> >>>> depends on KPROBES
> >>>> - depends on X86
> >>>> + depends on X86 || PPC
> >>>> bool "Enable kprobes-based dynamic events"
> >>>> select TRACING
> >>>> default y
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Linuxppc-dev mailing list
> >>>> Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
> >>>> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
> >>>>
> >> Thanks for reviewing.
> >
> > We are creating a new user space API here, so I'm keen for others to take
> > a good look at the interface before we commit to something we are going
> > to have to keep forever.
> >
> > Who is the main consumer of this (/me is pretty ignorant of kprobes)?
> > What do they think of the interface?
> >
> The user space API are already present in the upstream kernel and
> currently only supported architecture is x86. This patch provides ppc
> architecture specific interfaces that enables powerpc also in par with x86.
>
> The main consumer would be kernel developers who would like to see
> register values, arguments and stack when the probe hits at given text
> address.
>
> > Mikey
> > _______________________________________________
> > Linuxppc-dev mailing list
> > Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
> > https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
>
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
