On 2/4/21 4:19 PM, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
On 2/4/21 4:17 PM, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
Don't allow Uprobe on 2nd word of a prefixed instruction. As per
ISA 3.1, prefixed instruction should not cross 64-byte boundary.
So don't allow Uprobe on such prefixed instruction as well.
There are two ways
says 'did not emulate, may
have to single-step'.
Fixes: 930d6288a26787 ("powerpc: sstep: Add support for maddhd, maddhdu, maddld
instructions")
Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
Suggested-by: Michael Ellerman
Tested-by: Naveen N. Rao
Reviewed-by: Sandipan Das
---
arch/p
We currently unconditionally try to emulate newer instructions on older
Power versions that could cause issues. Gate it.
Fixes: 350779a29f11 ("powerpc: Handle most loads and stores in instruction
emulation code")
Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
---
[v4] Based on feedback
On 1/23/21 6:03 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli writes:
We currently just percolate the return value from analyze_instr()
to the caller of emulate_step(), especially if it is a -1.
For one particular case (opcode = 4) for instructions that
aren't currently emulated, we
says
'did not emulate, may have to single-step'.
Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
Tested-by: Naveen N. Rao
---
arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c | 49 +-
1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c b/arch
We currently unconditionally try to emulate newer instructions on older
Power versions that could cause issues. Gate it.
Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
---
[v3] Addressed Naveen's comments on scv and addpcis
[v2] Fixed description
arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c | 46
On 1/20/21 3:44 PM, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
On 2021/01/20 03:16PM, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
...
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c b/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c
index bf7a7d62ae8b..ed119858e5e9 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c
@@ -1528,6 +1528,8
We currently unconditionally try to emulate newer instructions on older
Power versions that could cause issues. Gate it.
Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
---
arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c | 40
1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch
We currently unconditionally try to newer emulate instructions on older
Power versions that could cause issues. Gate it.
Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
---
arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c | 40
1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch
On 10/5/20 9:42 AM, Mahesh Salgaonkar wrote:
Every error log reported by OPAL is exported to userspace through a sysfs
interface and notified using kobject_uevent(). The userspace daemon
(opal_errd) then reads the error log and acknowledges it error log is saved
safely to disk. Once acknowledged
On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 06:02:53PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Aug 2018 16:34:07 +1000
> Michael Ellerman wrote:
>
> > "Aneesh Kumar K.V" writes:
> > > On 08/08/2018 08:26 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > >> Mahesh J Salgaonkar writes:
> > >>> From: Mahesh Salgaonkar
> > >>>
r() or optimized_callback()).
>
> Reported-by: Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au>
> Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ana...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Bangoria <ravi.bango...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ana...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 07:23:38PM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
> With ABIv2, we offset 8 bytes into a function to get at the local entry
> point.
>
Looks good.
> Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ana...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 12:28:34AM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
> Allow kprobes to be placed on ftrace _mcount() call sites. This
> optimization avoids the use of a trap, by riding on ftrace
> infrastructure.
>
> This depends on HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_REGS which depends on
> MPROFILE_KERNEL,
>
> Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ana...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 02:08:02PM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
> This helper will be used in a subsequent patch to emulate instructions
> on re-entering the kprobe handler. No functional change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> c00d04c8 k _do_fork+0x8[DISABLED]
> c00d04d0 k _do_fork+0x10[DISABLED]
> c00412b0 k kretprobe_trampoline+0x0 [OPTIMIZED]
>
> Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ana...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
ename post_kprobe_handler() to kprobe_post_handler() for
> more uniform naming.
>
> Reported-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhira...@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ana...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 06:02:57PM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
> + if (!pev->uprobes && map->dso->symtab_type == DSO_BINARY_TYPE__KALLSYMS)
> tev->point.offset += PPC64LE_LEP_OFFSET;
uprobes check against kallsysms? Am I missing something here?
Ananth
l the symbols during symbol table load,
> but only adjust the probe trace point.
>
> Cc: Mark Wielaard <m...@redhat.com>
> Cc: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauer...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ana...@in.ibm.com>
> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 07:24:39PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 10:39 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 10:29:12PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> >
> > > Why is this selected by KVM on PPC if KVM on P
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 08:35:17PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-25-08 at 05:41:10 UTC, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
> > Add user return notifier support for powerpc. Similar to x86, this feature
> > keys off of the KVM Kconfig.
>
> Please flesh this out.
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 07:03:12PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 12:11 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 08:35:17PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2015-25-08 at 05:41:10 UTC, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 10:29:12PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 08:07 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 07:03:12PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 12:11 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
> >
Add user return notifier support for powerpc. Similar to x86, this feature
keys off of the KVM Kconfig.
Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
---
Documentation/features/debug/user-ret-profiler/arch-support.txt |2 +-
arch/powerpc/Kconfig
to be had with a direct
jump instead of a breakpoint, but the caveats need to be traded off
with the complexity it brings in.
For now, mark OPTPROBES na for powerpc.
Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
---
.../features/debug/optprobes/arch-support.txt |2 +-
1 file
On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 11:21:50AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
On 2015/07/16 19:56, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
Kprobes uses a breakpoint instruction to trap into execution flow
and the probed instruction is single-stepped from an alternate location.
On some architectures like
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 12:53:07PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Sun, 2015-07-19 at 11:21 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
On 2015/07/16 19:56, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
Kprobes uses a breakpoint instruction to trap into execution flow
and the probed instruction is single
To be used for features we will not support on a particular architecture.
The git log that adds this needs to provide the justification 'why?'
Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
---
Documentation/features/arch-support.txt |1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff
-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
---
.../features/debug/optprobes/arch-support.txt |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/features/debug/optprobes/arch-support.txt
b/Documentation/features/debug/optprobes/arch-support.txt
index
-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
---
.../features/debug/optprobes/arch-support.txt |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/features/debug/optprobes/arch-support.txt
b/Documentation/features/debug/optprobes/arch-support.txt
index
in more detail.
Masami, can I have your Acked-by or Reviewed-by?
Arnaldo,
FWIW, I have reviewed this code...
Reviewed-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
- Arnaldo
Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao naveen.n@linux.vnet.ibm.com
---
tools/perf/util/probe-event.c | 23
-by from
ppc developers should speed up this process.
Hi Arnaldo,
Yes, I have reviewed the patches. So, for all patches...
Reviewed-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https
| 6 +++
9 files changed, 170 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 tools/perf/arch/powerpc/util/elf-sym-decode.c
create mode 100644 tools/perf/util/elf_sym.h
For the full patchset...
Reviewed-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 02:40:00PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
(2014/05/08 13:47), Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 08:55:51PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
...
+#if defined(CONFIG_PPC64) (!defined(_CALL_ELF) || _CALL_ELF == 1)
+/*
+ * On PPC64 ABIv1
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 08:55:51PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
...
+#if defined(CONFIG_PPC64) (!defined(_CALL_ELF) || _CALL_ELF == 1)
+/*
+ * On PPC64 ABIv1 the function pointer actually points to the
+ * function's descriptor. The first entry in the descriptor is the
+ * address of the
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 10:23:01AM +0800, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
The branch target should be the func addr, not the addr of func_descr_t.
So using ppc_function_entry() to generate the right target addr.
Signed-off-by: Liu Ping Fan pingf...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
---
This bug will make ftrace fail
On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 03:20:58PM -0500, Tom Musta wrote:
Isn't that code occasionally used with uprobes too nowadays ?
Yes. I believe so.
I'm going to back-pedal a little. I reread code and can connect
single step code to kprobes but not necessarily to uprobes. So
I am not sure
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 10:40:10AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 17:14 +0530, Vasant Hegde wrote:
Add new return code to rtas_flash to indicate firmware entitlement
expiry. This will be used by the update_flash script to return
appropriate message to the user.
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 03:32:30PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Tue, 2013-04-23 at 10:35 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 10:40:10AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 17:14 +0530, Vasant Hegde wrote:
Add new return code
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
Some architectures like powerpc have multiple variants of the trap
instruction. Introduce an additional helper is_trap_insn() for run-time
handling of non-uprobe traps on such architectures.
While there, change is_swbp_at_addr
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
Powerpc has many trap variants that could be used by entities like gdb.
Currently, running gdb on a program being traced by uprobes causes an
endless loop since uprobes doesn't understand that the trap was inserted
by some other entity
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
The current implementation of uprobes assumes that uprobes always wins
even when a register request is at a location with a conditional
breakpoint by some other entity. Refer to [1] for more details.
Remove the breakpoint instruction check
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 03:54:06PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 03/22, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
+/**
+ * is_trap_insn - check if instruction is breakpoint instruction.
+ * @insn: instruction to be checked.
+ * Default implementation of is_trap_insn
+ * Returns true if @insn
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
Some architectures like powerpc have multiple variants of the trap
instruction. Introduce an additional helper is_trap_insn() for run-time
handling of non-uprobe traps on such architectures.
While there, change is_swbp_at_addr
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
Refuse to place a uprobe if a trap variant already exists in the
file copy at the address.
Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
---
kernel/events/uprobes.c |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Index
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
prepare_uprobe() already checks if the underlying unstruction
(on file) is a trap variant. We don't need to check this again.
Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/uprobes.c |6 --
1 file
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 05:06:44PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 03/20, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 01:26:39PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
But, at the same time, is the new definition fine for verify_opcode()?
IOW, powerpc has another is_trap() insn(s
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 05:07:28PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 03/20, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 01:43:01PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 03/20, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
But we did not install UPROBE_SWBP_INSN. Is it fine? I hope yes, just
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 05:00:02PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 03/21, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
?
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 05:07:28PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 03/20, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 01:43:01PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 04:58:09PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 03/21, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 05:06:44PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
But we did not install UPROBE_SWBP_INSN. Is it fine? I hope yes, just
to
verify. If not, we need 2
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
GDB uses a variant of the trap instruction that is different from the
one used by uprobes. Currently, running gdb on a program being traced
by uprobes causes an endless loop since uprobes doesn't understand
that the trap is inserted by some other
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 01:26:39PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Hi Ananth,
First of all, let me remind that I know nothing about powerpc ;)
But iirc we already discussed this a bit, I forgot the details but
still I have some concerns...
On 03/20, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
GDB
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 01:43:01PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 03/20, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
But we did not install UPROBE_SWBP_INSN. Is it fine? I hope yes, just to
verify. If not, we need 2 definitions. is_uprobe_insn() should still check
insns == UPROBE_SWBP_INSN, and is_swbp_insn()
.
Signed-off-by: Suzuki K. Poulose suz...@in.ibm.com
Cc: Ananth N Mavinakaynahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
Cc: Kumar Gala ga...@kernel.crashing.org
Cc: linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org
Acked-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing
, I suppose we can try to change that ATM driver to use a
different type name...
We can make it ppc_opcode_t. Attached is the patch that fixes this.
Regards,
Ananth
---
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
tree: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/benh/powerpc.git next
On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 05:11:53PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
After merging the final tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allyesconfig)
failed like this:
In file included from drivers/atm/fore200e.c:70:0:
drivers/atm/fore200e.h:263:3: error: redefinition of typedef
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 03:26:59PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 13:01 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
This is the port of uprobes to powerpc. Usage is similar to x86.
Guys, can you do a minimum
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
Move is_trap() and relatives to a common file to be shared between *probes.
Code movement only; no change in functionality.
Suggested by Michael Ellerman.
Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
Add thread_struct.trap_nr and use it to store the last exception
the thread experienced. In this patch, we populate the field at
various places where we force_sig_info() to the process.
This is also used in uprobes to determine if the probed
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
This is the port of uprobes to powerpc. Usage is similar to x86.
[root@ ~]# ./bin/perf probe -x /lib64/libc.so.6 malloc
Added new event:
probe_libc:malloc(on 0xb4860)
You can now use it in all perf tools, such as:
perf record
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 05:07:31PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 11:13 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
Yeah. A NULL regs here is a kernel bug, so I think it's actually
preferable to crash than silently return.
Or best, if you think there's a remote chance
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
Add thread_struct.trap_nr and use it to store the last exception
the thread experienced. In this patch, we populate the field at
various places where we force_sig_info() to the process.
This is also used in uprobes to determine if the probed
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
This is the port of uprobes to powerpc. Usage is similar to x86.
[root@ ~]# ./bin/perf probe -x /lib64/libc.so.6 malloc
Added new event:
probe_libc:malloc(on 0xb4860)
You can now use it in all perf tools, such as:
perf record
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 03:09:30PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
...
This is true for Intel like architectures that have *one* swbp
instruction. On Powerpc, gdb for instance, can insert a trap variant at
the address. Therefore, is_swbp_insn() by definition should return true
for all trap
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 02:28:20PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Wed, 2012-08-22 at 13:57 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
This is the port of uprobes to powerpc. Usage is similar to x86.
Hi Ananth,
Excuse my ignorance
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 05:00:31PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 08/17, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 05:21:12PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Hmm, I am not sure. is_swbp_insn(insn), as it is used in the arch agnostic
code, should only return true if insn
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 05:21:12PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
...
So, the arch agnostic code itself
takes care of this case...
Yes. I forgot about install_breakpoint()-is_swbp_insn() check which
returns -ENOTSUPP, somehow I thought arch_uprobe_analyze_insn() does
this.
or am I
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 07:41:53AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 18:59 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 07/26, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
This is the port of uprobes to powerpc. Usage is similar
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
Add thread_struct.trap_nr and use it to store the last exception
the thread experienced. In this patch, we populate the field at
various places where we force_sig_info() to the process.
This is also used in uprobes to determine if the probed
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
This is the port of uprobes to powerpc. Usage is similar to x86.
[root@ ~]# ./bin/perf probe -x /lib64/libc.so.6 malloc
Added new event:
probe_libc:malloc(on 0xb4860)
You can now use it in all perf tools, such as:
perf record
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 02:01:46PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Fri, 2012-06-08 at 14:51 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 04:38:17PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Fri, 2012-06-08 at 11:49 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Fri, Jun 08
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:51:54PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Fri, 2012-06-08 at 10:06 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:08:04AM -0700, Jim Keniston wrote:
On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 15:05 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 04:17:44PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Fri, 2012-06-08 at 11:31 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:51:54PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Fri, 2012-06-08 at 10:06 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Wed, Jun 06
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 04:38:17PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Fri, 2012-06-08 at 11:49 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 04:17:44PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Fri, 2012-06-08 at 11:31 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Fri, Jun 08
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
On RISC architectures like powerpc, instructions are fixed size.
Instruction analysis on such platforms is just a matter of (insn % 4).
Pass the vaddr at which the uprobe is to be inserted so that
arch_uprobe_analyze_insn() can flag misaligned
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
This is the port of uprobes to powerpc. Usage is similar to x86.
One TODO in this port compared to x86 is the uprobe abort_xol() logic.
x86 depends on the thread_struct.trap_nr (absent in powerpc) to determine
if a signal was caused when
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 05:14:23PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
* Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org [2012-06-06 11:40:15]:
* Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:23:52AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 14:49 +0530, Ananth
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:08:04AM -0700, Jim Keniston wrote:
On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 15:05 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:27:02AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 14:51 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
...
For the kernel
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
On RISC architectures like powerpc, instructions are fixed size.
Instruction analysis on such platforms is just a matter of (insn % 4).
Pass the vaddr at which the uprobe is to be inserted so that
arch_uprobe_analyze_insn() can flag misaligned
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
This is the port of uprobes to powerpc. Usage is similar to x86.
One TODO in this port compared to x86 is the uprobe abort_xol() logic.
x86 depends on the thread_struct.trap_nr (absent in powerpc) to determine
if a signal was caused when
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:27:02AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 14:51 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
One TODO in this port compared to x86 is the uprobe abort_xol() logic.
x86 depends on the thread_struct.trap_nr (absent in powerpc) to determine
if a signal
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:23:52AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 14:49 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
+int arch_uprobe_analyze_insn(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct mm_struct
*mm, loff_t vaddr)
Don't we traditionally use unsigned long to pass vaddrs
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:40:15AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:23:52AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 14:49 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
+int arch_uprobe_analyze_insn(struct
On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 09:48:25AM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 10:11:24AM +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 10:59:46AM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
On 11/08/2011 12:58 AM, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 11:18:32AM
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 03:18:14PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 14:18 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
The Processor Identification Register (PIR) on some powerpc platforms
provides information
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:17:55AM +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
At this rate we're going to end up with no bits left for CPU features
way too quickly... Especially for something we only care about once at
boot time.
Wouldn't CPU_FTR_PPCAS_ARCH_V2 be a good enough test
On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 10:59:46AM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
On 11/08/2011 12:58 AM, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 11:18:32AM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
What use does userspace have for this? If you want to return the
currently executing CPU (which unless you're
On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 11:18:32AM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
On 11/06/2011 10:47 PM, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
The Processor Identification Register (PIR) on powerpc provides
information to decode the processor identification tag. Decoding
this information platform specfic
powerpc platforms that
don't have it. Code in the kernel referencing PIR isn't under
a platform ifdef).
Signed-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/sysfs.c |6 ++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
Index: linux-3.1/arch/powerpc/kernel/sysfs.c
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:39:35AM +0800, Tiejun Chen wrote:
When enable CONFIG_PREEMPT we will trigger the following call trace:
BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/1/0x1000
...
krpobe always goes through the following path:
program_check_exception()
|
+
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 03:31:05PM +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 11:47:13PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
(2011/06/24 19:29), Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Fri, 2011-06-24 at 17:21 +0800, Yong Zhang wrote:
Hi,
When I use kprobe to do something, I found
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 11:47:13PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
(2011/06/24 19:29), Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Fri, 2011-06-24 at 17:21 +0800, Yong Zhang wrote:
Hi,
When I use kprobe to do something, I found some wired thing.
When CONFIG_FUNCTION_TRACER is disabled:
(gdb)
Hi Paul,
While we are at it, can we also add nop to the list of emulated
instructions?
Ananth
---
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
Emulate ori 0,0,0 (nop).
The long winded way is to do:
case 24:
rd = (instr 21) 0x1f;
if (rd != 0
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 03:22:45PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
On May 27, 2010, at 9:12 AM, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
Hi Paul,
While we are at it, can we also add nop to the list of emulated
instructions?
Dare I ask why we need to emulate nop?
We are close to getting
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 12:28:43PM +1000, Michael Neuling wrote:
In message 20100527141203.ga20...@in.ibm.com you wrote:
Hi Paul,
While we are at it, can we also add nop to the list of emulated
instructions?
Ananth
---
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 12:05:56PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 07:42:03PM +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
While we are at it, can we also add nop to the list of emulated
instructions?
I have a patch in development that emulates most of the arithmetic
are at it, can we also add nop to the list of emulated
instructions?
Ananth
---
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
Emulate ori 0,0,0 (nop).
The long winded way is to do:
case 24:
rd = (instr 21) 0x1f
-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli ana...@in.ibm.com
---
Index: linux-8mar/kernel/kprobes.c
===
--- linux-8mar.orig/kernel/kprobes.c2010-03-08 17:10:33.0 +0530
+++ linux-8mar/kernel/kprobes.c 2010-03-08 17:12:12.0
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo
