From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>,
Project Archer <archer@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: ptrace improvement ideas
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 21:07:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110208205953.GA15932@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110208015844.B994A1814A4@magilla.sf.frob.com>
On 02/07, Roland McGrath wrote:
>
> > There is already AFAIK some abstraction of DR regiters inside kernel so maybe
> > userland could get access to this abstraction to resolve these two issues.
>
> Indeed, there is now a layer called hw_breakpoint, with in-kernel APIs that
> are largely machine-independent. The legacy arch-specific ptrace interface
> for x86 is implemented on top of that (not purely so, but rather supported
> by that infrastructure as special cases). I think Oleg knows the details
> of that stuff better than I do at this point.
Yes, and hw_breakpoint is implemented on top of perf counters.
> I think the desireable approach is to figure out a new interface (ptrace
> extension, presumably) to use those new facilities directly from user
> space. It should be possible for such a new interface to be largely
> machine-independent too.
Probably yes... but it is not clear to me how exactly the new interface
should look. And it should coexist with the current ->ptrace_bps[] code.
And while register_user_hw_breakpoint() itself is arch independent, there
are still some details. Say, if the tracee traps, the tracer should know
somehow which bp was the reason.
But I agree it would be nice to have the simple "abstract" interface.
Jan, if you have any idea about how it should look - please tell us.
I _think_ that the actual implementation shoudn't be very very difficult,
although I can't say I understand this code in details.
> > It must explicitly require debug registers (hw watchpoints) inheritance.
> > Which happened before but it no longer happens in recent upstream kernels
> > (NOTABUG RH#660003).
>
> That is a good point and one I had not been thinking of,
Oh, yes, I missed this too.
> It's my feeling that the
> right way to approach this is to focus on a new set of interfaces built on
> the kernel's hw_breakpoint facility (that infrastructure may well need
> extending to deal well with userland better). Those can be defined with
> the inheritance and process-wide sharing issues in mind,
Hmm. This is also not clear to me...
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-08 21:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-03 22:39 Roland McGrath
2011-02-04 18:56 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-04 18:58 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-07 21:11 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-02-08 1:58 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-08 20:41 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-02-09 2:48 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-08 21:07 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2011-02-08 23:18 ` hw_breakpoint userland interface Roland McGrath
2011-02-10 21:03 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-10 21:14 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-11 20:17 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-10 20:00 ` ptrace improvement: PTRACE_O_INHERIT Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-11 19:24 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-11 20:46 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-12 0:59 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-12 19:11 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-14 19:31 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-14 19:46 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-15 0:36 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-15 13:16 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-15 21:43 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-02-15 21:56 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-16 19:42 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-16 19:45 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-16 20:09 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-16 20:16 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-19 19:48 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-02-19 20:37 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-20 8:18 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-02-20 21:05 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-21 19:54 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-22 19:39 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-22 20:49 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-22 21:10 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-22 22:16 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-21 19:44 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-15 22:02 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-16 16:02 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-02-16 18:28 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-16 20:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-16 20:07 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-16 20:32 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-16 19:48 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-16 20:02 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-16 20:15 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-16 20:31 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-16 21:04 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-16 21:51 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-16 19:38 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-16 19:40 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-15 22:17 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-16 20:48 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-16 11:31 ` ptrace improvement ideas (QPassSignals) Jan Kratochvil
2011-02-16 18:36 ` Roland McGrath
2011-02-16 20:21 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-02-18 20:24 ` Oleg Nesterov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110208205953.GA15932@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=archer@sourceware.org \
--cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).