Re: [PATCH v13 05/10] arm64: Kprobes with single stepping support

From: David Long <dave.long@linaro.org>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Cc: "Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	"Huang Shijie" <shijie.huang@arm.com>,
	"James Morse" <james.morse@arm.com>,
	"Marc Zyngier" <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	"Pratyush Anand" <panand@redhat.com>,
	"Sandeepa Prabhu" <sandeepa.s.prabhu@gmail.com>,
	"Will Deacon" <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	"William Cohen" <wcohen@redhat.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Steve Capper" <steve.capper@linaro.org>,
	"Li Bin" <huawei.libin@huawei.com>,
	"Adam Buchbinder" <adam.buchbinder@gmail.com>,
	"Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Andrey Ryabinin" <ryabinin.a.a@gmail.com>,
	"Ard Biesheuvel" <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	"Christoffer Dall" <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>,
	"Daniel Thompson" <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>,
	"Dave P Martin" <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
	"Jens Wiklander" <jens.wiklander@linaro.org>,
	"Jisheng Zhang" <jszhang@marvell.com>,
	"John Blackwood" <john.blackwood@ccur.com>,
	"Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	"Petr Mladek" <pmladek@suse.com>,
	"Robin Murphy" <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	"Suzuki K Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	"Vladimir Murzin" <Vladimir.Murzin@arm.com>,
	"Yang Shi" <yang.shi@linaro.org>,
	"Zi Shen Lim" <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>,
	"yalin wang" <yalin.wang2010@gmail.com>,
	"Mark Brown" <broonie@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 05/10] arm64: Kprobes with single stepping support
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 14:28:25 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <576AD8C9.7050109@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160614094559.51a7865fa30f3f31f6a70e37@kernel.org>

On 06/13/2016 08:45 PM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 11:22:47 -0400
> David Long <dave.long@linaro.org> wrote:
>
>> On 06/13/2016 02:50 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>>> On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 00:10:29 -0400
>>> David Long <dave.long@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     arch/arm64/Kconfig                      |   1 +
>>>>>>     arch/arm64/include/asm/debug-monitors.h |   5 +
>>>>>>     arch/arm64/include/asm/insn.h           |   4 +-
>>>>>>     arch/arm64/include/asm/kprobes.h        |  60 ++++
>>>>>>     arch/arm64/include/asm/probes.h         |  44 +++
>>>>>>     arch/arm64/kernel/Makefile              |   1 +
>>>>>>     arch/arm64/kernel/debug-monitors.c      |  18 +-
>>>>>>     arch/arm64/kernel/kprobes-arm64.c       | 144 +++++++++
>>>>>>     arch/arm64/kernel/kprobes-arm64.h       |  35 +++
>>>>>>     arch/arm64/kernel/kprobes.c             | 526 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>
>>>>> Not sure why kprobes.c and kprobes-arm64.c are splitted.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This comes from the model of the arm32 kprobes code where handling of
>>>> the low-level instruction simulation is implemented in separate files
>>>> for 32-bit vs. thumb instructions.  It should make a little more sense
>>>> in the future when additional instruction simulation code will hopefully
>>>> be added for those instructions we cannot currently single-step
>>>> out-of-line.  It also probably *could* be merged into one file.
>>>
>>> Hmm, at least the name of arch/arm64/kernel/kprobes-arm64.c is
>>> meaningless. As we've done in x86, I think we can make it
>>> arch/arm64/kernel/kprobes/decode-insn.{c,h}
>>>
>>
>> I've changed the name to kprobe-decode-insn.[hc], or do you feel
>> strongly the three kprobes source files in arch/arm64/kernel need their
>> own subdirectory?
>
> Yes, especially when we start working on kprobes-on-ftrace support,
> it is better to have a separate file for that.
>

I've reorganized the kprobes source files into their own subdirectory 
and changed some of their names.

> Thank you!
>
>

Thanks,
-dl