lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] perf powerpc: Don't call perf_event_disable from atomic context
On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 09:06:18AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 03:29:33PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> writes:
> > > So it would be good to also explain why PPC needs this in the first
> > > place.
> >
> > Unfortunately I don't really know the code, and the original author is AWOL.
> >
> > But AFAICS perf_event_disable() is only called here:
> >
> > if (!stepped) {
> > WARN(1, "Unable to handle hardware breakpoint. Breakpoint at "
> > "0x%lx will be disabled.", info->address);
> > perf_event_disable(bp);
> > goto out;
> > }
> >
> > Which is where we cope with the possibility that we couldn't emulate the
> > instruction that hit the breakpoint. Seems that is not an issue on x86,
> > or it's handled elsewhere?
>
> I don't think x86 ever needs to emulate things on hw breakpoint
> (although I could be mistaken), but I would expect ARM to maybe need
> so, and I couldn't find a disable there either.
>
> Will?

We don't do any emulation, so no need for us to call perf_event_disable
in the hw_breakpoint "overflow" path. We do play some awful games to
fake up a single-step, but I don't think perf core needs to care about
it.

Will

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-10-10 15:20    [W:0.122 / U:0.236 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site