On 09/15/2016 11:32 PM, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > @@ -176,18 +183,14 @@ int kgdb_arch_handle_exception(int exception_vector, > int signo, >>> * over and over again. >>> */ >>> kgdb_arch_update_addr(linux_regs, remcom_in_buffer); >>> - atomic_set(&kgdb_cpu_doing_single_step, -1); >>> - kgdb_single_step = 0; >> >> This is a subtle change, but I assume it is what you intended? All the CPUs >> will get released into the run state when exiting the kgdb exception handler. > You are talking about "- kgdb_single_step = 0." Right?
Correct. > Do you think that there is any (negative) side effect of this change? Not at all. The kernel debugger always skids to a stop, and it is more reliable from a locking perspective if the other CPU threads are released while a single CPU is asked to single step until the next "skid" for all the other CPUs. When you do not release the other CPUs you can end up single stepping a CPU which dead locks or never exits a lock elsewhere due to what ever it was blocking on never getting freed from another CPU. Cheers, Jason. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Kgdb-bugreport mailing list Kgdb-bugreport@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kgdb-bugreport
