lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Apr]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [V6,1/9] elf: Add new powerpc specifc core note sections
From
Date
On Thu, 2015-04-09 at 18:20 +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> On 04/09/2015 04:41 AM, Michael Neuling wrote:
> > On Wed, 2015-04-08 at 19:50 +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> >> Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote on 23.03.2015
> >> 11:34:30:
> >>
> >>>> With that in mind, do we have a way to set the top 32bits of the MSR
> >>>> (which contain the TM bits) when ptracing 32 bit processes? I can't
> >>>> find anything like that in this patch set.
> >>>
> >>> No, we dont have that yet. When ptracing in 32-bit mode the MSR value
> >>> which can be viewed or set from the user space through PTRACE_GETREGS
> >>> PTRACE_SETREGS call is it's lower 32 bits only. Either we can club
> >>> the upper 32 bits of MSR as part of one of the ELF core notes we are
> >>> adding in the patch series or we can create one more separate ELF core
> >>> note for that purpose. Let me know your opinion on this.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure I understand this. I thought we had the following:
> >>
> >> - If the process calling ptrace is itself 64-bit (which is how GDB is
> >> built on all current Linux distributions), then PTRACE_GETREGS etc.
> >> will *always* operate on 64-bit register sets, even if the target
> >> process is 32-bit.
> >>
> >> - If the process calling ptrace is 32-bit, then PTRACE_GETREGS will
> >> operate on 32-bit register sets. However, there is a separate
> >> PTRACE_GETREGS64 / PTRACE_SETREGS64 call that will also provide
> >> the opportunity to operate on the full 64-bit register set. Both
> >> apply independently of whether the target process is 32-bit or
> >> 64-bit.
> >>
> >> Is this not correct?
> >
> > I think you're correct. We should be right. I'd forgotten about the
> > GET/SETREGS64 interfaces.
>
> In that case, is the patch series complete and okay ? Is there any thing
> else we need to verify other than waiting for the GDB test results which
> Edjunior has been working on. But I am not aware of the status on the GDB
> test development front.

I think we are good.

Mikey

>
> Edjunior,
>
> Do you have any updates ?
>
> Regards
> Anshuman
>
>



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-04-10 05:41    [W:0.153 / U:0.380 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site