From: Pratyush Anand <panand@redhat.com> To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, wcohen@redhat.com, dave.long@linaro.org, steve.capper@linaro.org, srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, vijaya.kumar@caviumnetworks.com, Shi Yang <yang.shi@linaro.org>, Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>, Ashok Kumar <ashoks@broadcom.com>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>, Jungseok Lee <jungseoklee85@gmail.com>, "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>, Sandeepa Prabhu <sandeepa.s.prabhu@gmail.com>, Shaokun Zhang <zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com>, "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>, Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] arm64: Add uprobe support Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 12:43:08 +0530 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20160824071308.GA24311@localhost.localdomain> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20160809184943.GA17112@redhat.com> Hi Oleg, Thanks a lot for your review, and sorry for delayed response. On 09/08/2016:08:49:44 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 08/02, Pratyush Anand wrote: > > > > This patch adds support for uprobe on ARM64 architecture. > > I know nothing about ARM, so I can't actually review this change. > But it looks good to me ;) > > Just one note, > > > +int arch_uprobe_pre_xol(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct pt_regs *regs) > > +{ > > + struct uprobe_task *utask = current->utask; > > + > > + /* saved fault code is restored in post_xol */ > > + utask->autask.saved_fault_code = current->thread.fault_code; > > + > > + /* An invalid fault code between pre/post xol event */ > > + current->thread.fault_code = UPROBE_INV_FAULT_CODE; > > + > > + /* Instruction point to execute ol */ > > + instruction_pointer_set(regs, utask->xol_vaddr); > > + > > + user_enable_single_step(current); > > I don't think we want user_{enable,disable{_single_step in the long term, > please look at 9bd1190a11c9d2 "uprobes/x86: Do not (ab)use TIF_SINGLESTEP > /user_*_single_step() for single-stepping". it seems that ARM64 sets/clears > TIF_SINGLESTEP. You can also lool at saved_tf logic, probably ARM64 needs > the same. IIUC, then you mean that TIF_SINGLESTEP is a per task flag, while arch_uprobe_pre/post_xol() should enable/disable single stepping using a per uprobe_task, and we should have a flag in "struct arch_uprobe_task" to handle this, right? > > However, I agree we can do this later and initial version can use these > ptrace helpers. Yes, I would also like to do that change latter, because these set of patches have already been tested heavily with systemtap, so it would be better to go with an incremental changes latter on. ~Pratyush
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: panand@redhat.com (Pratyush Anand) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH 5/5] arm64: Add uprobe support Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 12:43:08 +0530 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20160824071308.GA24311@localhost.localdomain> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20160809184943.GA17112@redhat.com> Hi Oleg, Thanks a lot for your review, and sorry for delayed response. On 09/08/2016:08:49:44 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 08/02, Pratyush Anand wrote: > > > > This patch adds support for uprobe on ARM64 architecture. > > I know nothing about ARM, so I can't actually review this change. > But it looks good to me ;) > > Just one note, > > > +int arch_uprobe_pre_xol(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct pt_regs *regs) > > +{ > > + struct uprobe_task *utask = current->utask; > > + > > + /* saved fault code is restored in post_xol */ > > + utask->autask.saved_fault_code = current->thread.fault_code; > > + > > + /* An invalid fault code between pre/post xol event */ > > + current->thread.fault_code = UPROBE_INV_FAULT_CODE; > > + > > + /* Instruction point to execute ol */ > > + instruction_pointer_set(regs, utask->xol_vaddr); > > + > > + user_enable_single_step(current); > > I don't think we want user_{enable,disable{_single_step in the long term, > please look at 9bd1190a11c9d2 "uprobes/x86: Do not (ab)use TIF_SINGLESTEP > /user_*_single_step() for single-stepping". it seems that ARM64 sets/clears > TIF_SINGLESTEP. You can also lool at saved_tf logic, probably ARM64 needs > the same. IIUC, then you mean that TIF_SINGLESTEP is a per task flag, while arch_uprobe_pre/post_xol() should enable/disable single stepping using a per uprobe_task, and we should have a flag in "struct arch_uprobe_task" to handle this, right? > > However, I agree we can do this later and initial version can use these > ptrace helpers. Yes, I would also like to do that change latter, because these set of patches have already been tested heavily with systemtap, so it would be better to go with an incremental changes latter on. ~Pratyush
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-24 7:13 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2016-08-02 5:30 [PATCH 0/5] ARM64: Uprobe support added Pratyush Anand 2016-08-02 5:30 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-08-02 5:30 ` [PATCH 1/5] arm64: kprobe: protect/rename few definitions to be reused by uprobe Pratyush Anand 2016-08-02 5:30 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-08-02 5:30 ` [PATCH 2/5] arm64: kgdb_step_brk_fn: ignore other's exception Pratyush Anand 2016-08-02 5:30 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-08-02 5:30 ` [PATCH 3/5] arm64: Handle TRAP_HWBRKPT for user mode as well Pratyush Anand 2016-08-02 5:30 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-06 16:11 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-06 16:11 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-06 21:36 ` David Long 2016-09-06 21:36 ` David Long 2016-09-07 4:47 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-07 4:47 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-07 13:41 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-07 13:41 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-08-02 5:30 ` [PATCH 4/5] arm64: Handle TRAP_BRKPT " Pratyush Anand 2016-08-02 5:30 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-06 16:34 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-06 16:34 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-08-02 5:30 ` [PATCH 5/5] arm64: Add uprobe support Pratyush Anand 2016-08-02 5:30 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-08-09 18:49 ` Oleg Nesterov 2016-08-09 18:49 ` Oleg Nesterov 2016-08-24 7:13 ` Pratyush Anand [this message] 2016-08-24 7:13 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-08-24 15:47 ` Oleg Nesterov 2016-08-24 15:47 ` Oleg Nesterov 2016-08-24 15:56 ` Will Deacon 2016-08-24 15:56 ` Will Deacon 2016-08-25 13:33 ` Oleg Nesterov 2016-08-25 13:33 ` Oleg Nesterov 2016-09-20 16:59 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-20 16:59 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-21 11:00 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-21 11:00 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-21 17:04 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-21 17:04 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-22 3:23 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-22 3:23 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-22 16:50 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-22 16:50 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-23 4:12 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-23 4:12 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-23 13:05 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-23 13:05 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-25 17:02 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-25 17:02 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-26 11:01 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-26 11:01 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-26 13:03 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-26 13:03 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-27 13:51 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-27 13:51 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-27 15:03 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-27 15:03 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-28 17:12 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-09-28 17:12 ` Catalin Marinas 2016-08-24 7:26 ` [PATCH 0/5] ARM64: Uprobe support added Pratyush Anand 2016-08-24 7:26 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-20 2:51 ` Pratyush Anand 2016-09-20 2:51 ` Pratyush Anand
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20160824071308.GA24311@localhost.localdomain \ --to=panand@redhat.com \ --cc=andre.przywara@arm.com \ --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \ --cc=ashoks@broadcom.com \ --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \ --cc=dave.long@linaro.org \ --cc=james.morse@arm.com \ --cc=jungseoklee85@gmail.com \ --cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \ --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \ --cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \ --cc=oleg@redhat.com \ --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \ --cc=sandeepa.s.prabhu@gmail.com \ --cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \ --cc=steve.capper@linaro.org \ --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \ --cc=vijaya.kumar@caviumnetworks.com \ --cc=vladimir.murzin@arm.com \ --cc=wcohen@redhat.com \ --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \ --cc=yang.shi@linaro.org \ --cc=zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.