[PATCH v6 4/4] ARM: Add KGDB/KDB FIQ debugger generic code
daniel.thompson at linaro.org
Mon Jun 30 06:54:11 PDT 2014
On 26/06/14 10:54, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>> Also bear in mind that svc_entry calls trace_hardirqs_off - is this
>> appropriate and safe for the FIQ to call?
> I personally think it appropriate and it looked safe on the lockdep side
> of things. However I will look a bit deeper at this since I don't
> remember how far I chased things back.
I've reviewed as far as I can.
Regarding safety I can't find anything much to upset the FIQ handler. I
think it might occasionally trigger the trace code's recursion avoidance
causing the trace event to be dropped but that's about it.
I admit I came very close to removing the trace_hardirqs calls from the
FIQ code but in the end I've left it. The hardirqs *are* off during FIQ
>>> + msr cpsr_c, #FIQ_MODE | PSR_I_BIT | PSR_F_BIT
>> Here we switch to FIQ mode. What about the PSR_A_BIT which prevents
>> imprecise aborts on ARMv6+ ?
>> Nevertheless, I think it's safe because the A bit will be set by the
>> CPU when taking the FIQ exception, and it should remain set since
>> cpsr_c won't modify it.
> Note that while double checking this I realized that this code will drop
> the value of PSR_ISETSTATE (T bit) that the vector_stub macro set for
> us. I'll fix this.
I was wrong about this. CPSR T bit is part of execution state can cannot
be modified by msr.
> I've picked out the following actions from the above:
> 1. Wrap a save and restore lr_abt and spsr_abt around the FIQ handler
> 2. Add a paired up trace_hardirqs_on() (and review more deeply).
> 3. Add comments explaining hazards w.r.t. data abort,
> 4. Correctly manage T bit during transition back to FIQ mode.
> Do I miss anything?
I hope not!
More information about the linux-arm-kernel