lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Dec]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ARM: ftrace: Ensure code modifications are synchronised across all cpus
From
Date
On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 16:23 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:

> That's fine if there are better ways. If your view is that this would
> bring things "up to the future" consider this: what you suggest is possible
> with the standard ARM 32-bit instruction set. With the more modern Thumb
> instruction set, because we now effectively have prefixes, where those
> prefixes control the execution of the following instructions, what you
> suggest becomes no longer possible.
>
> So, it's not a question of bringing stuff up to the future at all... you
> can call it a design regression of you will, but you're really making
> demands about how CPUs work which are outside of your remit.
>
> Think of this a bit like you changing the opcodes immediately following a
> 'LOCK' prefix on x86. I suspect divorsing the following opcodes from its
> prefix would be very bad for the instructions atomicity.

But what about the limitations that the function tracer imposes on the
code that gets modified by stop_machine()?

1) the original code is simply a call to mcount

2) on boot up, that call gets converted into a nop

3) the code that gets changed will only be converting a nop to a call
into the function tracer, and back again.

IOW, it's a very limited subset of the ARM assembly that gets touched.
I'm not sure what the op codes are for the above, but I can imagine they
don't impose the prefixes as you described.

If that's the case, is it still possible to change to the breakpoint
method?

-- Steve




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-12-07 18:21    [W:0.119 / U:1.160 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site