From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <systemtap-return-17658-listarch-systemtap=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 6651 invoked by alias); 18 Mar 2011 19:10:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 6644 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Mar 2011 19:10:55 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from toast.topped-with-meat.com (HELO topped-with-meat.com) (168.75.111.31)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 18 Mar 2011 19:10:50 +0000
Received: by topped-with-meat.com (Postfix, from userid 5281)	id 4BAF12C183; Fri, 18 Mar 2011 12:10:47 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
X-Fcc: ~/Mail/lkml
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,    Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,    Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,    Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,    Linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,    Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@infradead.org>,    Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,    Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,    Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,    Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com>,    Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,    Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,    SystemTap <systemtap@sources.redhat.com>,    Jim Keniston <jkenisto@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,    Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>,    LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,    "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2.6.38-rc8-tip 6/20] 6: x86: analyze instruction and determine fixups.
In-Reply-To: Srikar Dronamraju's message of  Saturday, 19 March 2011 00:19:22 +0530 <20110318184922.GA31152@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <20110314133403.27435.7901.sendpatchset@localhost6.localdomain6>	<20110314133507.27435.71382.sendpatchset@localhost6.localdomain6>	<alpine.LFD.2.00.1103151529130.2787@localhost6.localdomain6>	<20110318182457.GA24048@linux.vnet.ibm.com>	<20110318183629.2AB052C286@topped-with-meat.com>	<20110318184922.GA31152@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Message-Id: <20110318191047.4BAF12C183@topped-with-meat.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 19:10:00 -0000
X-CMAE-Score: 0
X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=K6VZ71qI c=1 sm=1 a=WaHTwlwe2vUA:10		a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=8PYZixKV93lXvnu6C90A:9 a=CCnuJsjoL3lipwxSKYfDwGtsXwsA:4		a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=WkljmVdYkabdwxfqvArNOQ==:117
Mailing-List: contact systemtap-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <systemtap.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:systemtap-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Post: <mailto:systemtap@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:systemtap-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faqs>
Sender: systemtap-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-q1/txt/msg00493.txt.bz2

> So we rewrite the copy of instruction (stored in XOL) such that it
> accesses its memory operand indirectly thro a scratch register.
> The contents of the scratch register are stored before singlestep and
> restored later.

I see.  That should work fine in principle, assuming you use a register
that is not otherwise involved, of course.  I hope you arrange to restore
the register if the copied instruction is never run because of a signal or
suchlike.  In that case, it's important that the signal context get the
original register and original PC rather than the fiddled state for running
the copy.  Likewise, if anyone is inspecting the registers right after the
step.


Thanks,
Roland