Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752707Ab2HPLpT (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Aug 2012 07:45:19 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:53286 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751109Ab2HPLpP convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Aug 2012 07:45:15 -0400 Message-ID: <1345117498.29668.23.camel@twins> Subject: Re: powerpc/perf: hw breakpoints return ENOSPC From: Peter Zijlstra To: Michael Neuling Cc: K Prasad , Frederic Weisbecker , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Ingo Molnar Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 13:44:58 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20344.1345115849@neuling.org> References: <28857.1345091034@neuling.org> <1345102812.31459.114.camel@twins> <20344.1345115849@neuling.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2089 Lines: 52 On Thu, 2012-08-16 at 21:17 +1000, Michael Neuling wrote: > Peter, > > > > On this second syscall, fetch_bp_busy_slots() sets slots.pinned to be 1, > > > despite there being no breakpoint on this CPU. This is because the call > > > the task_bp_pinned, checks all CPUs, rather than just the current CPU. > > > POWER7 only has one hardware breakpoint per CPU (ie. HBP_NUM=1), so we > > > return ENOSPC. > > > > I think this comes from the ptrace legacy, we register a breakpoint on > > all cpus because when we migrate a task it cannot fail to migrate the > > breakpoint. > > > > Its one of the things I hate most about the hwbp stuff as it relates to > > perf. > > > > Frederic knows more... > > Maybe I should wait for Frederic to respond but I'm not sure I > understand what you're saying. > > I can see how using ptrace hw breakpoints and perf hw breakpoints at the > same time could be a problem, but I'm not sure how this would stop it. ptrace uses perf for hwbp support so we're stuck with all kinds of stupid ptrace constraints.. or somesuch. > Are you saying that we need to keep at least 1 slot free at all times, > so that we can use it for ptrace? No, I'm saying perf-hwbp is weird because of ptrace, maybe the ptrace weirdness shouldn't live in perf-hwpb but in the ptrace-perf glue however.. > Is "perf record -e mem:0x10000000 true" ever going to be able to work on > POWER7 with only one hw breakpoint resource per CPU? I think it should work... but I'm fairly sure it currently doesn't because of how things are done. 'perf record -ie mem:0x100... true' might just work. I always forget all the ptrace details but I am forever annoyed at the mess that is perf-hwbp.. Frederic is there really nothing we can do about this? The fact that ptrace hwbp semantics are different per architecture doesn't help of course. -- 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/