Received: by 2002:a25:e7d8:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id e207csp956261ybh; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:34:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsK5hKT5CpiR7oiJJEJm0dFMRdvYCg+7EKpKhPyuOulL75EjBYpzcRBaJrxFRyCYYeo8JAW X-Received: by 2002:a9d:4702:: with SMTP id a2mr17578606otf.319.1583865251395; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:34:11 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1583865251; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=khWfxTUabzF8ZiAwMS7CID7c+WaC1YAqP44iBXS6OeJbn+Tj1vkXk9D2JHK0XgIw9i WnmOXR9hl37YwHeYABJZ+B4HuWH8jB/t2X3q8kYJedZad1BSVTXiPZfdiwDofl9/3CVQ 21vZycAOTh5bhWxv8h+wD18tSZfzTktoqlI51WvQhpg0GE5z2AJDrHAfbWMC2nZZeyIh Eli9gpS/KCzecB7UAf6JFgTrD3Nu+Yvbxm4EFGII/R6pzzOEJ83arJaH76iAJ9cr6sj0 hFAmP4Qkq5cHKPJYU4oH5LyslbStQgjCYN6BYappTBM3y29DJjUYzr58kfg/DIEHpksa 262A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from; bh=AeMwCxC2OFi2JFxpxwk04XKTAnq/aYmzjQohYjbkVaw=; b=RdVhew3pQ6y8Lpep5RnBIPN7XM1GANU/cCEfm23RKlnrJnqMEmISR0n36Yt/tnf4Oy Rih5wAknayjaDFBwhN0gIRQ1uDp932h7cTHjV+cMA/MiTKgOEEZysIynXFSgzyWsn5tF Y5avcdcIiErlf7FM7Jo0QDx0HnwMzNJE3umFS4P+kXA3dEk4JgEAAtBss2r3LLa9yv5K g26HZykh5KxLkGl+y2VM7tYe+I8wCbZtrwCHe+dSltYBHMooR66dFs7KEwYglMF4XQVb JGDTH9hVAOOnQxh925uuOPuWJQL7nBRp8pc7BTtGt7A2r0Z7jQZVwmcfE9VdSMSecSHl wtEA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a59si8813939otb.8.2020.03.10.11.33.59; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 11:34:11 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727593AbgCJSb5 (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:31:57 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:34856 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727268AbgCJSb5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 14:31:57 -0400 Received: from p5de0bf0b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([93.224.191.11] helo=nanos.tec.linutronix.de) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1jBjfG-0001FW-W1; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 19:31:39 +0100 Received: by nanos.tec.linutronix.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 62A48104084; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 19:31:38 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Mathieu Desnoyers Cc: linux-kernel , Peter Zijlstra , rostedt , Masami Hiramatsu , Alexei Starovoitov , paulmck , "Joel Fernandes\, Google" , Frederic Weisbecker Subject: Re: Instrumentation and RCU In-Reply-To: <1666704263.23816.1583862003925.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> References: <87mu8p797b.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <1403546357.21810.1583779060302.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <871rq171ca.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <1489283504.23399.1583852595008.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <87imjc5f6a.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <1666704263.23816.1583862003925.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 19:31:38 +0100 Message-ID: <87d09k5aet.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mathieu Desnoyers writes: > ----- On Mar 10, 2020, at 12:48 PM, Thomas Gleixner tglx@linutronix.de wrote: >> How do you "fix" that when you can't reach the tracepoint because you >> trip over a breakpoint and then while trying to fixup that stuff you hit >> another one? > > I may still be missing something, but if the fixup code (AFAIU the code performing > the out-of-line single-stepping of the original instruction) belongs to a section > hidden from instrumentation, it should not be an issue. Sure, but what guarantees that on the way there is nothing which might call into instrumentable code? Nothing, really. That's why I want the explicit sections which can be analyzed by tools. Humans (including me) are really bad at it was demonstrated several times. Thanks, tglx