While in theory user_enable_single_step/user_disable_single_step/
user_enable_blockstep could also be provided as an inline or macro there's
no good reason to do so, and having the prototype in one places keeps code
size and confusion down.
Roland said:
The original thought there was that user_enable_single_step() et al
might well be only an instruction or three on a sane machine (as if we
have any of those!), and since there is only one call site inlining
would be beneficial. But I agree that there is no strong reason to care
about inlining it.
As to the arch changes, there is only one thought I'd add to the
record. It was always my thinking that for an arch where
PTRACE_SINGLESTEP does text-modifying breakpoint insertion,
user_enable_single_step() should not be provided. That is,
arch_has_single_step()=>true means that there is an arch facility with
"pure" semantics that does not have any unexpected side effects.
Inserting a breakpoint might do very unexpected strange things in
multi-threaded situations. Aside from that, it is a peculiar side
effect that user_{enable,disable}_single_step() should cause COW
de-sharing of text pages and so forth. For PTRACE_SINGLESTEP, all these
peculiarities are the status quo ante for that arch, so having
arch_ptrace() itself do those is one thing. But for building other
things in the future, it is nicer to have a uniform "pure" semantics
that arch-independent code can expect.
OTOH, all such arch issues are really up to the arch maintainer. As
of today, there is nothing but ptrace using user_enable_single_step() et
al so it's a distinction without a practical difference. If/when there
are other facilities that use user_enable_single_step() and might care,
the affected arch's can revisit the question when someone cares about
the quality of the arch support for said new facility.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Acked-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
fix the following 'make headers_check' warning:
usr/include/asm-mn10300/ptrace.h:80: extern's make no sense in userspace
Signed-off-by: Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinderrajput@gmail.com>
Add utrace/tracehooks support to MN10300.
Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
This patch contains the following cleanups for the asm/ptrace.h
userspace headers:
- include/asm-generic/Kbuild.asm already lists ptrace.h, remove
the superfluous listings in the Kbuild files of the following
architectures:
- cris
- frv
- powerpc
- x86
- don't expose function prototypes and macros to userspace:
- arm
- blackfin
- cris
- mn10300
- parisc
- remove #ifdef CONFIG_'s around #define's:
- blackfin
- m68knommu
- sh: AFAIK __SH5__ should work in both kernel and userspace,
no need to leak CONFIG_SUPERH64 to userspace
- xtensa: cosmetical change to remove empty
#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ #else #endif
from the userspace headers
Not changed by this patch is the fact that the following architectures
have a different struct pt_regs depending on CONFIG_ variables:
- h8300
- m68knommu
- mips
This does not work in userspace.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Acked-by: Greg Ungerer <gerg@uclinux.org>
Acked-by: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
Acked-by: Grant Grundler <grundler@parisc-linux.org>
Acked-by: Jesper Nilsson <jesper.nilsson@axis.com>
Acked-by: Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>
Acked-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Acked-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Add architecture support for the MN10300/AM33 CPUs produced by MEI to the
kernel.
This patch also adds board support for the ASB2303 with the ASB2308 daughter
board, and the ASB2305. The only processor supported is the MN103E010, which
is an AM33v2 core plus on-chip devices.
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: nuke cvs control strings]
Signed-off-by: Masakazu Urade <urade.masakazu@jp.panasonic.com>
Signed-off-by: Koichi Yasutake <yasutake.koichi@jp.panasonic.com>
Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Christoph Hellwig