[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20081016025728.3F92B1544CB@magilla.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 19:57:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
To: prasad@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...e.hu,
jason.wessel@...driver.com, avi@...ranet.com,
richardj_moore@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch 2/9] x86 architecture implementation of Hardware
Breakpoint interfaces
I'm leaving aside the single-step stuff, which I just posted about.
I'm also concerned about getting RF right here. We need to make sure that
every place that warps ->ip away somewhere also clears RF. In case of
instruction breakpoints in user space, we might also want to mask RF from
being seen/changed via ptrace/user_regset (a bit like is done for TF).
I'm a little inclined to do a first x86 version without instruction
breakpoint support and hash out the rest of the code for a bit. Then add
instruction breakpoints in a later patch. (Not that it has to be a lot
later or anything. Just to table the detailed review of RF fiddling until
after most of the meaty stuff is pretty baked.)
Thanks,
Roland
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists