[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56FD1BD1.7070101@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 20:45:05 +0800
From: Li Bin <huawei.libin@...wei.com>
To: Pratyush Anand <panand@...hat.com>, He Kuang <hekuang@...wei.com>
CC: <mark.rutland@....com>, <yang.shi@...aro.org>,
<wangnan0@...wei.com>, <marc.zyngier@....com>,
<catalin.marinas@....com>, <will.deacon@....com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <richard@....at>,
<james.morse@....com>, <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <Dave.Martin@....com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>,
Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: Fix watchpoint recursion when single-step is
wrongly triggered in irq
Hi Pratyush,
on 2016/3/21 18:24, Pratyush Anand wrote:
> On 21/03/2016:08:37:50 AM, He Kuang wrote:
>> On arm64, watchpoint handler enables single-step to bypass the next
>> instruction for not recursive enter. If an irq is triggered right
>> after the watchpoint, a single-step will be wrongly triggered in irq
>> handler, which causes the watchpoint address not stepped over and
>> system hang.
>
> Does patch [1] resolves this issue as well? I hope it should. Patch[1] has still
> not been sent for review. Your test result will be helpful.
>
> ~Pratyush
>
> [1] https://github.com/pratyushanand/linux/commit/7623c8099ac22eaa00e7e0f52430f7a4bd154652
This patch did not consider that, when excetpion return, the singlestep flag
should be restored, otherwise the right singlestep will not triggered.
Right?
Thanks,
Li Bin
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists