[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150508092346.GB24744@cbox>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 11:23:46 +0200
From: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@...aro.org>
To: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu, marc.zyngier@....com,
peter.maydell@...aro.org, agraf@...e.de, drjones@...hat.com,
pbonzini@...hat.com, zhichao.huang@...aro.org,
jan.kiszka@...mens.com, dahi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
r65777@...escale.com, bp@...e.de,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE..." <x86@...nel.org>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>,
Bharat Bhushan <Bharat.Bhushan@...escale.com>,
Mihai Caraman <mihai.caraman@...escale.com>,
Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@...abs.ru>,
Nadav Amit <namit@...technion.ac.il>,
"open list:LINUX FOR POWERPC..." <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:ABI/API" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/12] KVM: define common __KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_SW/HW_BP
values
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 05:23:17PM +0100, Alex Bennée wrote:
> Currently x86, powerpc and soon arm64 use the same two architecture
> specific bits for guest debug support for software and hardware
> breakpoints. This makes the shared values explicit while leaving the
> gate open for another architecture to use some other value if they
> really really want to.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/powerpc/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> index ab4d473..1731569 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> @@ -310,8 +310,8 @@ struct kvm_guest_debug_arch {
> * and upper 16 bits are architecture specific. Architecture specific defines
> * that ioctl is for setting hardware breakpoint or software breakpoint.
> */
> -#define KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_SW_BP 0x00010000
> -#define KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_HW_BP 0x00020000
> +#define KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_SW_BP __KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_SW_BP
> +#define KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_HW_BP __KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_HW_BP
>
> /* definition of registers in kvm_run */
> struct kvm_sync_regs {
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> index d7dcef5..1438202 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> @@ -250,8 +250,8 @@ struct kvm_debug_exit_arch {
> __u64 dr7;
> };
>
> -#define KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_SW_BP 0x00010000
> -#define KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_HW_BP 0x00020000
> +#define KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_SW_BP __KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_SW_BP
> +#define KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_HW_BP __KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_HW_BP
> #define KVM_GUESTDBG_INJECT_DB 0x00040000
> #define KVM_GUESTDBG_INJECT_BP 0x00080000
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> index 70ac641..3b6252e 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> @@ -570,8 +570,16 @@ struct kvm_s390_irq_state {
>
> /* for KVM_SET_GUEST_DEBUG */
>
> -#define KVM_GUESTDBG_ENABLE 0x00000001
> -#define KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP 0x00000002
> +#define KVM_GUESTDBG_ENABLE (1 << 0)
> +#define KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP (1 << 1)
> +
> +/*
> + * Architecture specific stuff uses the top 16 bits of the field,
s/stuff/<something more specific>/
> + * however there is some shared commonality for the common cases
> + */
> +#define __KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_SW_BP (1 << 16)
> +#define __KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_HW_BP (1 << 17)
> +
>
> struct kvm_guest_debug {
> __u32 control;
We sort of left this discussion hanging with me expressing slight
concern about the usefulness about these defines.
Paolo, what are your thoughts?
-Christoffer
--
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