From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5086 invoked by alias); 3 Jun 2010 11:39:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 5071 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Jun 2010 11:39:24 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-vw0-f41.google.com (HELO mail-vw0-f41.google.com) (209.85.212.41) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 11:39:12 +0000 Received: by vws13 with SMTP id 13so41435vws.0 for ; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 04:39:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.12.201 with SMTP id y9mr4679790qay.235.1275565150610; Thu, 03 Jun 2010 04:39:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.74.79 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Jun 2010 04:39:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1275405490.22316.12.camel@e102319-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1275405490.22316.12.camel@e102319-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 11:39:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [HELP]Can GDB for ARM set hard breakpoint when native debugging? From: "karthikeyan.s" To: Matthew Gretton-Dann Cc: Will Deacon , gdb@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-06/txt/msg00010.txt.bz2 Hi Will, Just in case you are going to re-use most of the code for 2.6.35. In hw_breakpoint.c, the handlers do not release the locks on wtpt/bkpt not matched. Should rather be: if (val !=3D (unpredictable & ~0x3)) { rcu_read_unlock(); continue; } Otherwise I get a "schedule while atomic" bug. -Karthik On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 8:48 PM, Matthew Gretton-Dann wrote: > On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 20:35 +0530, karthikeyan.s wrote: >> Hi, >> > I've had a go at implementing a backend for hardware watchpoints and b= reakpoints in the Kernel: >> > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2010-March/01117 >> > 0.html >> Thanks. >> >> >I'm hoping to submit a newer version of this patchset against 2.6.35. >> >I'll add you on CC when I post it to the list. The main changes will be: >> Thanks again! Looking forward to it. >> >> Going through your patch and will be trying it soon. At first sight, >> seems the gdb changes aren't there in that link. Can you point me to >> the gdb changes? > > We don't have any gdb patches in a releasable state at this moment in > time. =A0When the ptrace interface settles down in the 2.6.35 Linux > kernel, and the updated kernel patch has been submitted, we will submit > patches to take advantage of hardware breakpoints to gdb. > > Thanks, > > Matt > > -- > Matthew Gretton-Dann > Principal Engineer - PDSW Tools > ARM Ltd > > --=20 --- S. Karthikeyan | +919980814745 ---