lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Aug]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Q: user_enable_single_step() && update_debugctlmsr()
On 08/01/2012 04:01 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 08/01, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>>
>> On 08/01/2012 03:46 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>>
>>>>> But, worse, isn't it wrong? Suppose that debugger switches to
>>>>> another TIF_SINGLESTEP&& !TIF_BLOCKSTEP task, in this case
>>>>> we "leak" DEBUGCTLMSR_BTF, no?
>>>>
>>>> __switch_to_xtra() should notice the difference in the TIF_BLOCKSTEP
>>>> flag and disable it.
>>>
>>> And how it can notice the difference if there is no difference?
>>>
>>> (unless, of course debugger is TIF_BLOCKSTEP'ed).
>>
>> Yes. enable_step() sets DEBUGCTLMSR_BTF along with TIF_BLOCKSTEP.
>> kprobes checks the same flag before touching DEBUGCTLMSR_BTF.
>
> It seems that you replied to the wrong email or I am confused ;)

No I think I replied to the correct one :)
enable_step() is the only place for ptrace/debugger which is touching
DEBUGCTLMSR_BTF. It always sets DEBUGCTLMSR_BTF and TIF_BLOCKSTEP in
sync so why should they both end up different? And once
__switch_to_extra() notices that TIF_BLOCKSTEP from the previous task
is different from the next task is different, then the CPU flag has
to be changed.

> Let's ignore kprobes here.

done.

>
> Oleg.
>


Sebastian


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-08-01 17:01    [W:0.130 / U:1.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site