Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752717AbZLMCsl (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Dec 2009 21:48:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751832AbZLMCsk (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Dec 2009 21:48:40 -0500 Received: from fallback.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.13]:54054 "HELO fallback.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751425AbZLMCsk (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Dec 2009 21:48:40 -0500 Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2009 14:24:28 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Jason Wessel Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Paul Mackerras , Frederic Weisbecker , lkml , Alan Stern , "K.Prasad" , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [RFC] Fix 2.6.33 x86 regression to kgdb hw breakpoints - due to perf API changes Message-ID: <20091212132428.GB22389@elte.hu> References: <4B227F2C.7050403@windriver.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B227F2C.7050403@windriver.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: 0.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=0.0 required=5.9 tests=none autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 _SUMMARY_ Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1718 Lines: 39 * Jason Wessel wrote: > I'll lead with a question. Are the people making the Perf API changes > booting allyesconfig kernels? > > The regression tests built into the kernel for kgdb fail as a result > of the perf API changes and can result in a hard kernel hang. > > My hope would have been that someone would have reported the problem, > created a patch to disable the test that hangs the kernel, or to fix > kgdb such that it works with the API changes. Likewise, if there are > tests I should run to regression test the changes to the perf API, I > would like to know since we all want to make use of the same hw > resource. > > A patch has been included in this mail which allows kgdb to pass the > internal regression tests for hw breakpoints. I would like to get > some comments or start a discussion as to how to solve this problem in > the 2.6.33 cycle, as it is a regression in functionality. Hm, the kgdb hw-breakpoint changes freshly put into v2.6.33 look pretty broken: they access the raw hw registers and ignore the higher level abstraction. Your patch still uses way too low level primitives. Please use the highlevel abstraction: register/unregister_wide_hw_breakpoint() should do the trick. (if there's any changes/extensions needed to it then please let us know about it.) If that's too much for v2.6.33 then i guess we need to revert or disable the kgdb hw-breakpoint changes for now. Thanks, Ingo -- 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/