[PATCH] arm64: reenable interrupt when handling ptrace breakpoint

Shi, Yang yang.shi at linaro.org
Fri Feb 5 13:25:47 PST 2016

On 1/13/2016 10:10 AM, Shi, Yang wrote:
> On 1/13/2016 9:23 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 09:17:46AM -0800, Shi, Yang wrote:
>>> On 1/13/2016 2:26 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:59:54AM -0800, Shi, Yang wrote:
>>>>> This might be buried in email storm during the holiday. Just want
>>>>> to double
>>>>> check the status. I'm supposed there is no objection for getting it
>>>>> merged
>>>>> in upstream?
>>>> Sorry, when you replied with:
>>>>> I think we could just extend the "signal delay send" approach from
>>>>> x86-64
>>>>> to arm64, which is currently used by x86-64 on -rt kernel only.
>>>> I understood that you were going to fix -rt, so I dropped this pending
>>>> anything more from you.
>>>> What's the plan?
>>> Sorry for the confusion. The "signal delay send" approach used by
>>> x86-64 -rt
>>> should be not necessary for arm64 right now. Reenabling interrupt is
>>> still
>>> the preferred approach.
>>> Since x86-64 has per-CPU IST exception stack, so preemption has to be
>>> disabled all the time. However, it is not applicable to other
>>> architectures
>>> for now, including arm64.
>> Actually, we grew support for a separate IRQ stack in the recent merge
>> window. Does that change things here, or are you referring to something
>> else?
> Had a quick look at the patches, it looks the irq stack is not nestable
> and it switches back to the original stack as long as irq handler is
> done before preempt happens. So, it sounds it won't change things here.

Just had a quick test on 4.5-rc1. It survives with kgdbts, ptrace and 
ltp. So, it sounds safe with the "separate IRQ stack" change.


> Thanks.,
> Yang
>> Will

More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list