On 15/09/16 08:56, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 03:58:51PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 02:13:13AM +0100, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
Could you please review my patch below?
See also arm64 maintainer's comment:
-ETIMEDOUT waiting for the kdgb folk to comment. Ppeople have reported
that this patch is required for kgdb to work correctly on arm64, so I'm
happy to merge it.
I'm happy, too.
I'll keep an eye out and FWIW see if I can throw in a review. I'm not
really one of "kgdb folk" but did examine it fairly deeply in the early
stages of the FIQ/NMI work (and which has since stopped focussing on kgdb).
I have some equally elderly, albeit rather less critical, kdb patches
that I should have pushed harder for so I'm sympathetic here ;-)
However, as detailed in your comment log:
(1) moves kgdb_disable_single_step() from 'c' command handling to single
This makes sure that single stepping gets effective at every 's' command.
Please note that, under the current implementation, single step bit in
spsr, which is cleared by the first single stepping, will not be set
again for the consecutive 's' commands because single step bit in mdscr
is still kept on (that is, kernel_active_single_step() in
kgdb_arch_handle_exception() is true).
(2) re-implements kgdb_roundup_cpus() because the current implementation
enabled interrupts naively. See below.
(3) removes 'enable_dbg' in el1_dbg.
Single step bit in mdscr is turned on in do_handle_exception()->
kgdb_handle_expection() before returning to debugged context, and if
debug exception is enabled in el1_dbg, we will see unexpected single-
stepping in el1_dbg.
Since v3.18, the following patch does the same:
commit 1059c6bf8534 ("arm64: debug: don't re-enable debug exceptions
on return from el1_dbg)
(4) masks interrupts while single-stepping one instruction.
If an interrupt is caught during processing a single-stepping, debug
exception is unintentionally enabled by el1_irq's 'enable_dbg' before
returning to debugged context.
Thus, like in (2), we will see unexpected single-stepping in el1_irq.
this patch is doing *far* too much in one go. Could you please repost it
as a series of self-contained fixes with clear commit messages, so I can
queue them and cc stable where appropriate?
Sure, but I need to refresh my memory here.