[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130420214632.GA6155@jshin-Toonie>
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 16:46:32 -0500
From: Jacob Shin <jacob.shin@....com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, <x86@...nel.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] perf: Add hardware breakpoint address mask
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 06:22:23PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 04/09, Jacob Shin wrote:
> >
> > @@ -612,6 +612,9 @@ static int hw_breakpoint_add(struct perf_event *bp, int flags)
> > if (!(flags & PERF_EF_START))
> > bp->hw.state = PERF_HES_STOPPED;
> >
> > + if (bp->attr.bp_addr_mask && !arch_has_hw_breakpoint_addr_mask())
> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > +
>
> This is called by sched_in... Isn't it "too late" ?
>
> Perhaps arch_validate_hwbkpt_settings() should validate mask/cpu_has_bpext?
Ah, yes okay. Should I do this for all the archs that HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT ?
Or is creating HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT_ADDR_MASK and in validate_hw_breakpoint:
#ifndef HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT_ADDR_MASK
if (bp->attr.bp_addr_mask)
return -EOPNOTSUPP;
#endif
Okay to do?
--
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