Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210628172632.81029-1-jiangshanlai@gmail.com>
 <46e0aaf1-b7cd-288f-e4be-ac59aa04908f@redhat.com> <c79d0167-7034-ebe2-97b7-58354d81323d@linux.alibaba.com>
 <397a448e-ffa7-3bea-af86-e92fbb273a07@redhat.com> <a4e07fb1-1f36-1078-0695-ff4b72016d48@linux.alibaba.com>
 <01946b5a-9912-3dfb-36f0-031f425432d2@redhat.com> <CALMp9eQWnUM-O7VmMWTGE2C2YraWxM2K0QcOQnbkctkzg_1pUA@mail.gmail.com>
 <bac2de6d-ae6d-565d-38f2-0c46b06cee0f@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <bac2de6d-ae6d-565d-38f2-0c46b06cee0f@redhat.com>
From:   Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Date:   Fri, 9 Jul 2021 10:01:54 -0700
Message-ID: <CALMp9eRrPtidJOamfSnkHT-PnPRXZ7SXkw9JFW-Q38v0Q-ws5w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Also reload the debug registers before
 kvm_x86->run() when the host is using them
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc:     Lai Jiangshan <laijs@linux.alibaba.com>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 9:59 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 09/07/21 18:35, Jim Mattson wrote:
> >>>> Just what you said, it's not easy and the needs are limited.  I
> >>>> implemented kvm_vcpu_check_breakpoint because I was interested in
> >>>> using hardware breakpoints from gdb, even with unrestricted_guest=0
> >>>> and invalid guest state, but that's it.
> >>> It seems kvm_vcpu_check_breakpoint() handles only for code breakpoint
> >>> and doesn't handle for data breakpoints.
> >> Correct, there's a comment above the call.  But data breakpoint are much
> >> harder and relatively less useful.
> >
> > Data breakpoints are actually quite useful. I/O breakpoints not so much.
>
> Normally yes; much less for the specific case of debugging
> invalid-guest-state or other invocations of the emulator.

Agreed. But if they don't actually work in-guest (because the emulator
ignores them), then their normal usefulness is curtailed.