On Sunday 06 November 2016 01:01 AM, Anton Blanchard wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> kprobe, uprobe, hw-breakpoint and xmon are the only user of
>> emulate_step.
>>
>> Kprobe / uprobe single-steps instruction if they can't emulate it, so
>> there is no problem with them. As I mention, hw-breakpoint is broken.
On Sunday 06 November 2016 01:01 AM, Anton Blanchard wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> kprobe, uprobe, hw-breakpoint and xmon are the only user of
>> emulate_step.
>>
>> Kprobe / uprobe single-steps instruction if they can't emulate it, so
>> there is no problem with them. As I mention, hw-breakpoint is broken.
Hi,
> kprobe, uprobe, hw-breakpoint and xmon are the only user of
> emulate_step.
>
> Kprobe / uprobe single-steps instruction if they can't emulate it, so
> there is no problem with them. As I mention, hw-breakpoint is broken.
> However I'm not sure about xmon, I need to check that.
I was
Hi,
> kprobe, uprobe, hw-breakpoint and xmon are the only user of
> emulate_step.
>
> Kprobe / uprobe single-steps instruction if they can't emulate it, so
> there is no problem with them. As I mention, hw-breakpoint is broken.
> However I'm not sure about xmon, I need to check that.
I was
On Friday 04 November 2016 07:37 AM, Andrew Donnellan wrote:
> On 03/11/16 21:27, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
>> Yes, kernel-space hw-breakpoint feature is broken on LE without this.
>
> Is there any actual user-visible feature that depends on this, or is this
> solely for debugging and development
On Friday 04 November 2016 07:37 AM, Andrew Donnellan wrote:
> On 03/11/16 21:27, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
>> Yes, kernel-space hw-breakpoint feature is broken on LE without this.
>
> Is there any actual user-visible feature that depends on this, or is this
> solely for debugging and development
On 03/11/16 21:27, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
Yes, kernel-space hw-breakpoint feature is broken on LE without this.
Is there any actual user-visible feature that depends on this, or is
this solely for debugging and development purposes?
It would of course be *nice* to have it in stable trees
On 03/11/16 21:27, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
Yes, kernel-space hw-breakpoint feature is broken on LE without this.
Is there any actual user-visible feature that depends on this, or is
this solely for debugging and development purposes?
It would of course be *nice* to have it in stable trees
On Thursday 03 November 2016 03:18 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Ravi Bangoria writes:
>
>> On Thursday 03 November 2016 02:34 AM, Anton Blanchard wrote:
>>> Hi Ravi,
>>>
emulate_step() uses a number of underlying kernel functions that were
initially
On Thursday 03 November 2016 03:18 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Ravi Bangoria writes:
>
>> On Thursday 03 November 2016 02:34 AM, Anton Blanchard wrote:
>>> Hi Ravi,
>>>
emulate_step() uses a number of underlying kernel functions that were
initially not enabled for LE. This has been
Ravi Bangoria writes:
> On Thursday 03 November 2016 02:34 AM, Anton Blanchard wrote:
>> Hi Ravi,
>>
>>> emulate_step() uses a number of underlying kernel functions that were
>>> initially not enabled for LE. This has been rectified since. So, fix
>>>
Ravi Bangoria writes:
> On Thursday 03 November 2016 02:34 AM, Anton Blanchard wrote:
>> Hi Ravi,
>>
>>> emulate_step() uses a number of underlying kernel functions that were
>>> initially not enabled for LE. This has been rectified since. So, fix
>>> emulate_step() for LE for the corresponding
On Thursday 03 November 2016 02:34 AM, Anton Blanchard wrote:
> Hi Ravi,
>
>> emulate_step() uses a number of underlying kernel functions that were
>> initially not enabled for LE. This has been rectified since. So, fix
>> emulate_step() for LE for the corresponding instructions.
> Thanks.
On Thursday 03 November 2016 02:34 AM, Anton Blanchard wrote:
> Hi Ravi,
>
>> emulate_step() uses a number of underlying kernel functions that were
>> initially not enabled for LE. This has been rectified since. So, fix
>> emulate_step() for LE for the corresponding instructions.
> Thanks.
Hi Ravi,
> emulate_step() uses a number of underlying kernel functions that were
> initially not enabled for LE. This has been rectified since. So, fix
> emulate_step() for LE for the corresponding instructions.
Thanks. Should this be queued up for stable?
Anton
> Reported-by: Anton Blanchard
Hi Ravi,
> emulate_step() uses a number of underlying kernel functions that were
> initially not enabled for LE. This has been rectified since. So, fix
> emulate_step() for LE for the corresponding instructions.
Thanks. Should this be queued up for stable?
Anton
> Reported-by: Anton Blanchard
emulate_step() uses a number of underlying kernel functions that were
initially not enabled for LE. This has been rectified since. So, fix
emulate_step() for LE for the corresponding instructions.
Reported-by: Anton Blanchard
Signed-off-by: Ravi Bangoria
emulate_step() uses a number of underlying kernel functions that were
initially not enabled for LE. This has been rectified since. So, fix
emulate_step() for LE for the corresponding instructions.
Reported-by: Anton Blanchard
Signed-off-by: Ravi Bangoria
---
arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c | 20
18 matches
Mail list logo