| Message ID | 1427816446-31586-4-git-send-email-alex.bennee@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 31 March 2015 at 16:40, Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote: > This adds support for single-step. There isn't much to do on the QEMU > side as after we set-up the request for single step via the debug ioctl > it is all handled within the kernel. > > Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> > > --- > v2 > - convert to using HSR_EC > > diff --git a/target-arm/kvm.c b/target-arm/kvm.c > index 290c1fe..ae0f8b2 100644 > --- a/target-arm/kvm.c > +++ b/target-arm/kvm.c > @@ -475,6 +475,7 @@ void kvm_arch_post_run(CPUState *cs, struct kvm_run *run) > */ > > #define HSR_EC_SHIFT 26 > +#define HSR_EC_SOFT_STEP 0x32 > #define HSR_EC_SW_BKPT 0x3c We already include internals.h in this file, so can you just use the EC_* constants and ARM_EL_EC_SHIFT rather than defining new ones? (Applies for patch 1 as well.) > static int kvm_handle_debug(CPUState *cs, struct kvm_run *run) > @@ -483,6 +484,13 @@ static int kvm_handle_debug(CPUState *cs, struct kvm_run *run) > int hsr_ec = arch_info->hsr >> HSR_EC_SHIFT; > > switch (hsr_ec) { > + case HSR_EC_SOFT_STEP: > + if (cs->singlestep_enabled) { > + return true; > + } else { > + error_report("Came out of SINGLE STEP when not enabled"); This can only happen if there's a kernel bug, right? > + } > + break; > case HSR_EC_SW_BKPT: > if (kvm_find_sw_breakpoint(cs, arch_info->pc)) { > return true; > @@ -542,6 +550,9 @@ int kvm_arch_on_sigbus(int code, void *addr) > > void kvm_arch_update_guest_debug(CPUState *cs, struct kvm_guest_debug *dbg) > { > + if (cs->singlestep_enabled) { > + dbg->control |= KVM_GUESTDBG_ENABLE | KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP; > + } > if (kvm_sw_breakpoints_active(cs)) { > dbg->control |= KVM_GUESTDBG_ENABLE | KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_SW_BP; > } > -- > 2.3.4 > thanks -- PMM
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes: > On 31 March 2015 at 16:40, Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote: >> This adds support for single-step. There isn't much to do on the QEMU >> side as after we set-up the request for single step via the debug ioctl >> it is all handled within the kernel. >> >> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> >> >> --- >> v2 >> - convert to using HSR_EC >> >> diff --git a/target-arm/kvm.c b/target-arm/kvm.c >> index 290c1fe..ae0f8b2 100644 >> --- a/target-arm/kvm.c >> +++ b/target-arm/kvm.c >> @@ -475,6 +475,7 @@ void kvm_arch_post_run(CPUState *cs, struct kvm_run *run) >> */ >> >> #define HSR_EC_SHIFT 26 >> +#define HSR_EC_SOFT_STEP 0x32 >> #define HSR_EC_SW_BKPT 0x3c > > We already include internals.h in this file, so can you just use > the EC_* constants and ARM_EL_EC_SHIFT rather than defining > new ones? (Applies for patch 1 as well.) > >> static int kvm_handle_debug(CPUState *cs, struct kvm_run *run) >> @@ -483,6 +484,13 @@ static int kvm_handle_debug(CPUState *cs, struct kvm_run *run) >> int hsr_ec = arch_info->hsr >> HSR_EC_SHIFT; >> >> switch (hsr_ec) { >> + case HSR_EC_SOFT_STEP: >> + if (cs->singlestep_enabled) { >> + return true; >> + } else { >> + error_report("Came out of SINGLE STEP when not enabled"); > > This can only happen if there's a kernel bug, right? Sure. Should we report it differently? abort() out? > >> + } >> + break; >> case HSR_EC_SW_BKPT: >> if (kvm_find_sw_breakpoint(cs, arch_info->pc)) { >> return true; >> @@ -542,6 +550,9 @@ int kvm_arch_on_sigbus(int code, void *addr) >> >> void kvm_arch_update_guest_debug(CPUState *cs, struct kvm_guest_debug *dbg) >> { >> + if (cs->singlestep_enabled) { >> + dbg->control |= KVM_GUESTDBG_ENABLE | KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP; >> + } >> if (kvm_sw_breakpoints_active(cs)) { >> dbg->control |= KVM_GUESTDBG_ENABLE | KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_SW_BP; >> } >> -- >> 2.3.4 >> > > > thanks > -- PMM
On 21 April 2015 at 13:56, Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote: > > Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes: >>> switch (hsr_ec) { >>> + case HSR_EC_SOFT_STEP: >>> + if (cs->singlestep_enabled) { >>> + return true; >>> + } else { >>> + error_report("Came out of SINGLE STEP when not enabled"); >> >> This can only happen if there's a kernel bug, right? > > Sure. Should we report it differently? abort() out? Saying 'This would be a kernel bug' in a comment would do... -- PMM
diff --git a/target-arm/kvm.c b/target-arm/kvm.c index 290c1fe..ae0f8b2 100644 --- a/target-arm/kvm.c +++ b/target-arm/kvm.c @@ -475,6 +475,7 @@ void kvm_arch_post_run(CPUState *cs, struct kvm_run *run) */ #define HSR_EC_SHIFT 26 +#define HSR_EC_SOFT_STEP 0x32 #define HSR_EC_SW_BKPT 0x3c static int kvm_handle_debug(CPUState *cs, struct kvm_run *run) @@ -483,6 +484,13 @@ static int kvm_handle_debug(CPUState *cs, struct kvm_run *run) int hsr_ec = arch_info->hsr >> HSR_EC_SHIFT; switch (hsr_ec) { + case HSR_EC_SOFT_STEP: + if (cs->singlestep_enabled) { + return true; + } else { + error_report("Came out of SINGLE STEP when not enabled"); + } + break; case HSR_EC_SW_BKPT: if (kvm_find_sw_breakpoint(cs, arch_info->pc)) { return true; @@ -542,6 +550,9 @@ int kvm_arch_on_sigbus(int code, void *addr) void kvm_arch_update_guest_debug(CPUState *cs, struct kvm_guest_debug *dbg) { + if (cs->singlestep_enabled) { + dbg->control |= KVM_GUESTDBG_ENABLE | KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP; + } if (kvm_sw_breakpoints_active(cs)) { dbg->control |= KVM_GUESTDBG_ENABLE | KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_SW_BP; }
This adds support for single-step. There isn't much to do on the QEMU side as after we set-up the request for single step via the debug ioctl it is all handled within the kernel. Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> --- v2 - convert to using HSR_EC