On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 09:59:42AM +0000, Wang Nan wrote:
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> @@ -631,7 +631,7 @@ int arch_validate_hwbkpt_settings(struct perf_event *bp)
> info->address &= ~alignment_mask;
> info->ctrl.len <<= offset;
>
> - if (!bp->overflow_handler) {
> + if (is_default_overflow_handler(bp)) {
> /*
> * Mismatch breakpoints are required for single-stepping
> * breakpoints.
> @@ -754,7 +754,7 @@ static void watchpoint_handler(unsigned long addr,
> unsigned int fsr,
> * mismatch breakpoint so we can single-step over the
> * watchpoint trigger.
> */
> - if (!wp->overflow_handler)
> + if (is_default_overflow_handler(wp))
> enable_single_step(wp, instruction_pointer(regs));
>
> unlock:
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> b/arch/arm64/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> index b45c95d..4ef5373 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c
> @@ -616,7 +616,7 @@ static int breakpoint_handler(unsigned long unused,
> unsigned int esr,
> perf_bp_event(bp, regs);
>
> /* Do we need to handle the stepping? */
> - if (!bp->overflow_handler)
> + if (is_default_overflow_handler(bp))
> step = 1;
> unlock:
> rcu_read_unlock();
> @@ -712,7 +712,7 @@ static int watchpoint_handler(unsigned long addr,
> unsigned int esr,
> perf_bp_event(wp, regs);
>
> /* Do we need to handle the stepping? */
> - if (!wp->overflow_handler)
> + if (is_default_overflow_handler(wp))
> step = 1;
>
> unlock:
Will, why does it matter what the overflow handler is for this stuff?
