Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753326AbbHNWiy (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Aug 2015 18:38:54 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f54.google.com ([209.85.218.54]:36050 "EHLO mail-oi0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751102AbbHNWix (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Aug 2015 18:38:53 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Andy Lutomirski Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 15:38:32 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: More hw_breakpoint scariness reduction To: Peter Zijlstra , Linus Torvalds , X86 ML , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Sasha Levin , Masami Hiramatsu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 633 Lines: 17 Would you all consider it acceptable to disallow watchpoints on per cpu data entirely? I can think of a *lot* of places where hitting #DB when accessing per cpu data from entry asm would be bad. Of course, actually implementing that might be less than entirely fun, given that a cpu could be onlined after creating a watchpoint. --Andy -- Andy Lutomirski AMA Capital Management, LLC -- 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/