[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150706085140.GA30342@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2015 09:51:40 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>
Cc: "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu" <kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu>,
"christoffer.dall@...aro.org" <christoffer.dall@...aro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@....com>,
"peter.maydell@...aro.org" <peter.maydell@...aro.org>,
"agraf@...e.de" <agraf@...e.de>,
"drjones@...hat.com" <drjones@...hat.com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"zhichao.huang@...aro.org" <zhichao.huang@...aro.org>,
"jan.kiszka@...mens.com" <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>,
"dahi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <dahi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"r65777@...escale.com" <r65777@...escale.com>,
"bp@...e.de" <bp@...e.de>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:ABI/API" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 09/11] KVM: arm64: guest debug, HW assisted debug
support
On Fri, Jul 03, 2015 at 05:07:41PM +0100, Alex Bennée wrote:
> Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> writes:
> > On Thu, Jul 02, 2015 at 02:50:33PM +0100, Alex Bennée wrote:
> >> Are you happy with this?:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> +/**
> >> + * kvm_arch_dev_ioctl_check_extension
> >> + *
> >> + * We currently assume that the number of HW registers is uniform
> >> + * across all CPUs (see cpuinfo_sanity_check).
> >> + */
> >> int kvm_arch_dev_ioctl_check_extension(long ext)
> >> {
> >> int r;
> >> @@ -64,6 +71,12 @@ int kvm_arch_dev_ioctl_check_extension(long ext)
> >> case KVM_CAP_ARM_EL1_32BIT:
> >> r = cpu_has_32bit_el1();
> >> break;
> >> + case KVM_CAP_GUEST_DEBUG_HW_BPS:
> >> + r = hw_breakpoint_slots(TYPE_INST);
> >> + break;
> >> + case KVM_CAP_GUEST_DEBUG_HW_WPS:
> >> + r = hw_breakpoint_slots(TYPE_DATA);
> >> + break;
> >
> > Whilst I much prefer this code, it actually adds an unwanted dependency
> > on PERF_EVENTS that I didn't think about to start with. Sorry to keep
> > messing you about -- I guess your original patch is the best thing after
> > all.
>
> Everything looks to be in hw_breakpoint.[ch] which does depend on
> CONFIG_HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT which depends on PERF_EVENTS to be built.
> However the previous code depended on this behaviour as well.
I think your original approach (of sticking stuff in the header file) works
regardless of the CONFIG option, no?
> It would seem weird to enable guest debug using HW debug registers to
> debug the guest yet not allowing the host kernel to use them? Of course
> this is the only code they would share as all the magic of guest
> debugging is already mostly there for dirty guest handling.
>
> I'm not familiar with Kconfig but it looks like this is all part of
> arm64 defconfig. Are people really going to want to disable PERF_EVENTS
> but still debug their guests with HW support?
Then it's your call. I just find the host dependency on perf a bit weird
to get guest debug working (especially as the dependency is completely
"fake" because we don't use any perf infrastructure at all).
Will
--
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