lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jul]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH] hw-breakpoints, kgdb, x86: add a flag topassDIE_DEBUG notification
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 10:49:20AM -0500, Jason Wessel wrote:
> On 07/23/2010 09:07 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 08:19:54AM -0500, Jason Wessel wrote:
> >
> >> On 07/23/2010 08:04 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >>
> >> The patch may or may not be the right way to solve the problem. It is
> >> worth noting that early breakpoints are handled separately with a direct
> >> writes to the debug registers so this API does not apply.
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > But you still need to handle them on the debug exception, right?
> >
> >
> >
>
> Yes, but at that point kgdb is first in line for the notifier so it
> works out of the box.


Ok.



> > Right.
> >
> > Actually NOTIFY_DONE is returned when there is more work to do: handling
> > another exception than breakpoint, or sending a signal. Otherwise yeah,
> > we return NOTIFY_STOP as we assume there is more work to do.
> >
> >
>
> For this specific case the hw_breakpoint handler simply consumed a
> breakpoint which was not intended for it.



Ah right.

But that thing is right:

/*
* Reset the 'i'th TRAP bit in dr6 to denote completion of
* exception handling
*/
(*dr6_p) &= ~(DR_TRAP0 << i);
/*
* bp can be NULL due to lazy debug register switching
* or due to concurrent perf counter removing.
*/
if (!bp) {
rcu_read_unlock();
break;
}

We need to prevent from dr7 lazy switches. It means kgdb must first check
its own breakpoints.


> > So the following alternatives appear to me:
> >
> > - Moving the breakpoint exception handling into the
> > struct perf_event:overflow_handler. In fact I can't find the breakpoint
> > handling in kgdb.c
> >
> >
>
> It is in the generic die notification handler for kgdb (looking at
> 2.6.35-rc6)
>
> arch/x86/kernel/kgdb.c
>
> 516 static int __kgdb_notify(struct die_args *args, unsigned long cmd)
> ...
> 551 case DIE_DEBUG:
> 552 if (atomic_read(&kgdb_cpu_doing_single_step) !=
> -1) {
> 553 if (user_mode(regs))
> 554 return single_step_cont(regs, args);
> 555 break;
> 556 } else if (test_thread_flag(TIF_SINGLESTEP))
> 557 /* This means a user thread is single
> stepping
> 558 * a system call which should be ignored
> 559 */
> 560 return NOTIFY_DONE;
> 561 /* fall through */



But I can't find where the breakpoints are handled there.



>
> > - Have a higher priority in kgdb notifier (which means decreasing the one
> > of hw_breakpoint.c)
> >
>
> kgdb had always been last in line in arch/x86/kernel/kgdb.c:
>
> 608 static struct notifier_block kgdb_notifier = {
> 609 .notifier_call = kgdb_notify,
> 610
> 611 /*
> 612 * Lowest-prio notifier priority, we want to be notified
> last:
> 613 */
> 614 .priority = -INT_MAX,
> 615 };



Why? It seems to me a kernel debugger should have the highest priority
over anything.



>
> > - Always returning NOTIFY_DONE from the breakpoint path.
> >
> >
>
> Without some further investigation, I am not sure what this will do.



Nothing, this NOTIFY_STOP is only an optimization. But now I think that
won't solve the problem. We still clear a dr6 trap bit for a debug
exception due to lazy dr7 switches we have to handle.

This is why kgdb should have the highest priority, or use the overflow
callback.



> We
> don't want to make things worse of course. Because kgdb uses the
> request hw_breakpoint api to request slot reservation having an
> attribute to say don't do anything to this HW breakpoint is certainly
> one way to fix it.
>
> > Is this a regression BTW?
> >
> >
>
> Absolutely this is a regression. No change was made in kgdb related to
> this and the kgdb HW breakpoint regression tests (which come with the
> kernel) stopped working and bisect to the commit I mentioned.


Yep, this new breakpoint layer has been a PITA for kgdb :)



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-07-23 18:21    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site