From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753639AbcKIRip (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Nov 2016 12:38:45 -0500 Received: from mail-qt0-f177.google.com ([209.85.216.177]:35845 "EHLO mail-qt0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753335AbcKIRim (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Nov 2016 12:38:42 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/5] arm64: Allow hw watchpoint at varied offset from base address To: Will Deacon References: <9394621e1b9709178ba54133a1469937fedae355.1476941895.git.panand@redhat.com> <20161108032658.GB20591@arm.com> Cc: Mark Rutland , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, labath@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, onestero@redhat.com From: Pratyush Anand Message-ID: <308df167-0392-49c0-17c0-28e221bd030b@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 23:08:35 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20161108032658.GB20591@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Will, Thanks a lot for your review. On Tuesday 08 November 2016 08:56 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > Hi Pratyush, > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 11:18:14AM +0530, Pratyush Anand wrote: >> ARM64 hardware supports watchpoint at any double word aligned address. >> However, it can select any consecutive bytes from offset 0 to 7 from that >> base address. For example, if base address is programmed as 0x420030 and >> byte select is 0x1C, then access of 0x420032,0x420033 and 0x420034 will >> generate a watchpoint exception. >> >> Currently, we do not have such modularity. We can only program byte, >> halfword, word and double word access exception from any base address. >> >> This patch adds support to overcome above limitations. >> >> Signed-off-by: Pratyush Anand >> --- >> arch/arm64/include/asm/hw_breakpoint.h | 2 +- >> arch/arm64/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++------------------ >> arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c | 5 ++-- >> 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/hw_breakpoint.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/hw_breakpoint.h >> index 115ea2a64520..4f4e58bee9bc 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/hw_breakpoint.h >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/hw_breakpoint.h >> @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ struct perf_event; >> struct pmu; >> >> extern int arch_bp_generic_fields(struct arch_hw_breakpoint_ctrl ctrl, >> - int *gen_len, int *gen_type); >> + int *gen_len, int *gen_type, int *offset); >> extern int arch_check_bp_in_kernelspace(struct perf_event *bp); >> extern int arch_validate_hwbkpt_settings(struct perf_event *bp); >> extern int hw_breakpoint_exceptions_notify(struct notifier_block *unused, >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c >> index 26a6bf77d272..3c2b96803eba 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c >> @@ -349,7 +349,7 @@ int arch_check_bp_in_kernelspace(struct perf_event *bp) >> * to generic breakpoint descriptions. >> */ >> int arch_bp_generic_fields(struct arch_hw_breakpoint_ctrl ctrl, >> - int *gen_len, int *gen_type) >> + int *gen_len, int *gen_type, int *offset) >> { >> /* Type */ >> switch (ctrl.type) { >> @@ -369,8 +369,10 @@ int arch_bp_generic_fields(struct arch_hw_breakpoint_ctrl ctrl, >> return -EINVAL; >> } >> >> + *offset = ffs(ctrl.len) - 1; > > Do we want to fail the length == 0 case early? If you do add that check, > then you can use __ffs here instead. Yes, I think, your point can be taken. > >> /* Len */ >> - switch (ctrl.len) { >> + switch (ctrl.len >> *offset) { >> case ARM_BREAKPOINT_LEN_1: >> *gen_len = HW_BREAKPOINT_LEN_1; >> break; >> @@ -517,18 +519,17 @@ int arch_validate_hwbkpt_settings(struct perf_event *bp) >> default: >> return -EINVAL; >> } >> - >> - info->address &= ~alignment_mask; >> - info->ctrl.len <<= offset; >> } else { >> if (info->ctrl.type == ARM_BREAKPOINT_EXECUTE) >> alignment_mask = 0x3; >> else >> alignment_mask = 0x7; >> - if (info->address & alignment_mask) >> - return -EINVAL; >> + offset = info->address & alignment_mask; >> } >> >> + info->address &= ~alignment_mask; >> + info->ctrl.len <<= offset; > > Urgh, I really hate all this converting to and fro to keep perf happy. > FWIW, I'm at the point where I would seriously consider ripping out the > hw_breakpoint code and replacing it with a ptrace-specific backend so we > just drop all this crap. The only people that seem to use the perf interface > are those running the (failing) selftests. Given that we have to have > a bloody thread switch notifier *anyway*, all perf seems to give us is > complexity and restrictions. Yes, I agree. > >> /* >> * Disallow per-task kernel breakpoints since these would >> * complicate the stepping code. >> @@ -665,8 +666,8 @@ static int watchpoint_handler(unsigned long addr, unsigned int esr, >> struct pt_regs *regs) >> { >> int i, step = 0, *kernel_step, access; >> - u32 ctrl_reg; >> - u64 val, alignment_mask; >> + u32 ctrl_reg, lens, lene; >> + u64 val; >> struct perf_event *wp, **slots; >> struct debug_info *debug_info; >> struct arch_hw_breakpoint *info; >> @@ -684,25 +685,21 @@ static int watchpoint_handler(unsigned long addr, unsigned int esr, >> goto unlock; >> >> info = counter_arch_bp(wp); >> - /* AArch32 watchpoints are either 4 or 8 bytes aligned. */ >> - if (is_compat_task()) { >> - if (info->ctrl.len == ARM_BREAKPOINT_LEN_8) >> - alignment_mask = 0x7; >> - else >> - alignment_mask = 0x3; >> - } else { >> - alignment_mask = 0x7; >> - } >> >> - /* Check if the watchpoint value matches. */ >> + /* Check if the watchpoint value and byte select match. */ >> val = read_wb_reg(AARCH64_DBG_REG_WVR, i); >> - if (val != (addr & ~alignment_mask)) >> - goto unlock; >> - >> - /* Possible match, check the byte address select to confirm. */ >> ctrl_reg = read_wb_reg(AARCH64_DBG_REG_WCR, i); >> decode_ctrl_reg(ctrl_reg, &ctrl); >> - if (!((1 << (addr & alignment_mask)) & ctrl.len)) >> + lens = ffs(ctrl.len) - 1; >> + lene = fls(ctrl.len) - 1; > > Again, you can use the '__' variants to avoid the '- 1'. Ok. > >> + /* >> + * FIXME: reported address can be anywhere between "the >> + * lowest address accessed by the memory access that >> + * triggered the watchpoint" and "the highest watchpointed >> + * address accessed by the memory access". So, it may not >> + * lie in the interval of watchpoint address range. >> + */ >> + if (addr < val + lens || addr > val + lene) >> goto unlock; >> >> /* >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c >> index e0c81da60f76..0eb366a94382 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c >> @@ -327,13 +327,13 @@ static int ptrace_hbp_fill_attr_ctrl(unsigned int note_type, >> struct arch_hw_breakpoint_ctrl ctrl, >> struct perf_event_attr *attr) >> { >> - int err, len, type, disabled = !ctrl.enabled; >> + int err, len, type, offset, disabled = !ctrl.enabled; >> >> attr->disabled = disabled; >> if (disabled) >> return 0; >> >> - err = arch_bp_generic_fields(ctrl, &len, &type); >> + err = arch_bp_generic_fields(ctrl, &len, &type, &offset); >> if (err) >> return err; >> >> @@ -352,6 +352,7 @@ static int ptrace_hbp_fill_attr_ctrl(unsigned int note_type, >> >> attr->bp_len = len; >> attr->bp_type = type; >> + attr->bp_addr += offset; > > That's going to look pretty bizarre from userspace if it decides to read > back the address registers to find that they've mysteriously changed. > > Perhaps ptrace_hbp_get_addr needs to retrieve the address from the > arch_hw_breakpoint, like we do for the ctrl register. What do you think? ..and that should help...I will give it a try and will test before next revision. ~Pratyush