(I thought I had sent this email, last Tuesday itself, but saw this in my
draft today, something went wrong, sorry for the delay)
On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 02:14:47AM +0000, Haibo Xu (Arm Technology China) wrote:
> On 2019/3/4 18:12, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 08:25:28AM +0000, Haibo Xu (Arm Technology China)
> > wrote:
> >> On 2019/3/1 2:32, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> >>> Now that we have a new hook ptrace_syscall_enter that can be called from
> >>> syscall entry code and it handles PTRACE_SYSEMU in generic code, we
> >>> can do some cleanup using the same in syscall_trace_enter.
> >>>
> >>> Further the extra logic to find single stepping PTRACE_SYSEMU_SINGLESTEP
> >>> in syscall_slow_exit_work seems unnecessary. Let's remove the same.
> >>
> >> I think we should not change the logic here. Is so, it will double the
> >> report of syscall
> >> when PTRACE_SYSEMU_SINGLESTEP is enabled.
> >>
> >
> > I don't think that should happen, but I may be missing something.
> > Can you explain how ?
> >
>
> When PTRACE_SYSEMU_SINGLESTEP is enabled, both the _TIF_SYSCALL_EMU and
> _TIF_SINGLESTEP flags are set, but ptrace only need to report(send SIGTRAP)
> at the entry of a system call, no need to report at the exit of a system
> call.
>
Sorry, but I still not get it, we have:
step = ((flags & (_TIF_SINGLESTEP | _TIF_SYSCALL_EMU)) ==
_TIF_SINGLESTEP);
For me, this is same as:
step = ((flags & _TIF_SINGLESTEP) == _TIF_SINGLESTEP)
or
if (flags & _TIF_SINGLESTEP)
step = true;
So when PTRACE_SYSEMU_SINGLESTEP, _TIF_SYSCALL_EMU and _TIF_SINGLESTEP
are set and step evaluates to true.
So dropping _TIF_SYSCALL_EMU here should be fine. Am I still missing
something ?
--
Regards,
Sudeep
