Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754673AbbGFIwB (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2015 04:52:01 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:57991 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754567AbbGFIvz (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2015 04:51:55 -0400 Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2015 09:51:40 +0100 From: Will Deacon To: Alex =?iso-8859-1?Q?Benn=E9e?= Cc: "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu" , "christoffer.dall@linaro.org" , Marc Zyngier , "peter.maydell@linaro.org" , "agraf@suse.de" , "drjones@redhat.com" , "pbonzini@redhat.com" , "zhichao.huang@linaro.org" , "jan.kiszka@siemens.com" , "dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "r65777@freescale.com" , "bp@suse.de" , Gleb Natapov , Jonathan Corbet , Catalin Marinas , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , "open list:DOCUMENTATION" , open list , "open list:ABI/API" Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 09/11] KVM: arm64: guest debug, HW assisted debug support Message-ID: <20150706085140.GA30342@arm.com> References: <1435775343-20034-1-git-send-email-alex.bennee@linaro.org> <1435775343-20034-10-git-send-email-alex.bennee@linaro.org> <20150702084847.GB3418@arm.com> <87pp4asm6u.fsf@linaro.org> <20150703092323.GA1588@arm.com> <87h9plrzqq.fsf@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87h9plrzqq.fsf@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2438 Lines: 58 On Fri, Jul 03, 2015 at 05:07:41PM +0100, Alex Benn?e wrote: > Will Deacon writes: > > On Thu, Jul 02, 2015 at 02:50:33PM +0100, Alex Benn?e 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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/