From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To: "Haibo Xu (Arm Technology China)" <Haibo.Xu@arm.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
nd <nd@arm.com>, "jdike@addtoit.com" <jdike@addtoit.com>
Subject: Re: 答复: [PATCH] arm64/ptrace: add PTRACE_SYSEMU and PTRACE_SYSEMU_SINGLESTEP support
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2018 21:45:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3641125.aEYyuDiOni@blindfold> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AM4PR08MB29297B27FCC0E8696473523185030@AM4PR08MB2929.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Am Dienstag, 4. September 2018, 04:11:07 CEST schrieb Haibo Xu (Arm Technology China):
> Hi Richard,
>
> What do you mean by done it in the core? moving macro definition to include/uapi/linux/ptrace.h?
> The patch is strictly follow x86's sematic on PTRACE_SYSEMU/SINGLESTEP support.
Well, the feature itself is not really architecture specific.
Just because x86 does it in arch/x86, it does not mean that this is the best way.
I guess this is also what Will tried to say.
If we can, we should implement PTRACE_SYSEMU in the core ptrace code and not
per architecture.
> > > I wonder what Haibo Xu want to do with PTRACE_SYSEMU on arm64.
> > > Are you porting UML or gvisor to arm64?
> >
> > That's a good question. Haibo?
>
> The story is we are working on a container runtime(Google Gvisor) support on ARM64 platform,
> and the Gvisor depend on Linux kernel PTRACE_SYSEMU/SINGLESTEP support.
Gvisor also supports a kvm backend which should be *much* faster than PTRACE_SYSEMU.
Otherwise gvisor suffers from the same performance drawbacks as UML does.
Pagefaults via SIGSEGV/mmap, syscall gate via ptrace().
Did you check, is PTRACE_SYSEMU really the way to go for gvisor?
Last time I checked the KVM backend looked promising but still WIP, though.
I also wonder whether PTRACE_SYSEMU is really the only missing bit to support
gvisor on arm64. Did you check how to work around VIPT/VIVT caching issues?
UML (and gvisor in this context) have lots of implicit x86 dependencies.
Thanks,
//richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-04 19:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20180903062310.GA4524@haibo-VirtualBox>
2018-09-03 16:31 ` [PATCH] arm64/ptrace: add PTRACE_SYSEMU and PTRACE_SYSEMU_SINGLESTEP support Will Deacon
2018-09-03 16:40 ` Richard Weinberger
2018-09-03 16:57 ` Will Deacon
2018-09-04 2:11 ` 答复: " Haibo Xu (Arm Technology China)
2018-09-04 19:45 ` Richard Weinberger [this message]
2018-09-05 10:21 ` 答复: " Haibo Xu (Arm Technology China)
2018-10-16 2:54 ` Haibo Xu (Arm Technology China)
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=3641125.aEYyuDiOni@blindfold \
--to=richard@nod.at \
--cc=Catalin.Marinas@arm.com \
--cc=Haibo.Xu@arm.com \
--cc=Will.Deacon@arm.com \
--cc=jdike@addtoit.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nd@arm.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: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).