Re: [PATCH] UML utrace support, step 1

[Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>]

> OK, I'll do it this way.

Your replacement patch still has utrace_regset stuff in it, so it doesn't
compile without the later patches in the series.  Try applying only
utrace-tracehook.patch from the series, then get it to build and make your
utrace-tracehook-um.patch.  Then apply only utrace-regset.patch on top of
that, and get that building to make utrace-regset-um.patch.  Then apply
utrace-core.patch and utrace-ptrace-compat.patch to get ptrace finally
working again and make utrace-ptrace-compat-um.patch.

> Yup, I'll leave this here, with .name initialized as SUBARCH, with the
> regsets defined in sys-$(ARCH) somewhere.

You'll still find this insufficient when you get to biarch support (x86_64).
At least you'll have to add another one elsewhere too, and make
utrace_native_view refer to both.

> Fixed.  block-step is hardware-trap-on-branch or something similar?

Correct.

> No, this is with preempt off.

Ok.  We do seem to have a problem when the host has CONFIG_PREEMPT=y, which
makes me suspect it might be a race problem that could also hit with enough
hardware parallelism.  If you get a chance to try that and can characterize
the way it misbehaves at the level of specific ptrace/wait calls, that
would be a great help.  Otherwise I'll try to look into it when I get some
time, but it's falling down the queue a bit since people don't seem too put
out about it right now.


Thanks very much,
Roland
-
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/