On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 09:01:03AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On 2015/05/14 0:41, William Cohen wrote:
> > On 05/13/2015 05:22 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> >> On 2015/05/12 21:48, William Cohen wrote:
> >
> >>> Hi Dave,
> >>>
> >>> In some of the previous diagnostic output it looked like th
On 2015/05/14 0:41, William Cohen wrote:
> On 05/13/2015 05:22 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>> On 2015/05/12 21:48, William Cohen wrote:
>
>>> Hi Dave,
>>>
>>> In some of the previous diagnostic output it looked like things would go
>>> wrong
>>> in the entry.S when the D bit was cleared and the d
On 05/13/2015 03:58 PM, David Long wrote:
> On 05/13/15 11:41, William Cohen wrote:
>> On 05/13/2015 05:22 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>>> On 2015/05/12 21:48, William Cohen wrote:
>>
Hi Dave,
In some of the previous diagnostic output it looked like things would go
wrong
i
On 05/13/15 11:41, William Cohen wrote:
On 05/13/2015 05:22 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
On 2015/05/12 21:48, William Cohen wrote:
Hi Dave,
In some of the previous diagnostic output it looked like things would go wrong
in the entry.S when the D bit was cleared and the debug interrupts were
un
On 05/13/2015 05:22 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On 2015/05/12 21:48, William Cohen wrote:
>> Hi Dave,
>>
>> In some of the previous diagnostic output it looked like things would go
>> wrong
>> in the entry.S when the D bit was cleared and the debug interrupts were
>> unmasksed. I wonder if so
On 2015/05/12 21:48, William Cohen wrote:
> On 05/12/2015 01:54 AM, David Long wrote:
>> On 05/05/15 11:48, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 06:14:51AM +0100, David Long wrote:
On 05/01/15 21:44, William Cohen wrote:
> Dave Long and I did some additional experimentation to be
On 05/12/2015 01:54 AM, David Long wrote:
> On 05/05/15 11:48, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 06:14:51AM +0100, David Long wrote:
>>> On 05/01/15 21:44, William Cohen wrote:
Dave Long and I did some additional experimentation to better
understand what is condition causes th
On 05/05/15 11:48, Will Deacon wrote:
On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 06:14:51AM +0100, David Long wrote:
On 05/01/15 21:44, William Cohen wrote:
Dave Long and I did some additional experimentation to better
understand what is condition causes the kernel to sometimes spew:
Unexpected kernel single-ste
On 05/05/2015 05:02 PM, William Cohen wrote:
> On 05/05/2015 11:48 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 06:14:51AM +0100, David Long wrote:
>>> On 05/01/15 21:44, William Cohen wrote:
Dave Long and I did some additional experimentation to better
understand what is condition c
On 05/05/2015 11:48 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 06:14:51AM +0100, David Long wrote:
>> On 05/01/15 21:44, William Cohen wrote:
>>> Dave Long and I did some additional experimentation to better
>>> understand what is condition causes the kernel to sometimes spew:
>>>
>>> Unexpec
On 05/05/2015 11:48 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 06:14:51AM +0100, David Long wrote:
>> On 05/01/15 21:44, William Cohen wrote:
>>> Dave Long and I did some additional experimentation to better
>>> understand what is condition causes the kernel to sometimes spew:
>>>
>>> Unexpec
On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 06:14:51AM +0100, David Long wrote:
> On 05/01/15 21:44, William Cohen wrote:
> > Dave Long and I did some additional experimentation to better
> > understand what is condition causes the kernel to sometimes spew:
> >
> > Unexpected kernel single-step exception at EL1
> >
>
On 05/01/15 21:44, William Cohen wrote:
On 04/29/2015 06:23 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 03:58:21AM +0100, William Cohen wrote:
Hi All,
Hi Will,
I have been experimenting with the patches for arm64 kprobes support.
On occasion the kernel gets stuck in a loop printing outpu
On 04/29/2015 06:23 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 03:58:21AM +0100, William Cohen wrote:
>> Hi All,
>
> Hi Will,
>
>> I have been experimenting with the patches for arm64 kprobes support.
>> On occasion the kernel gets stuck in a loop printing output:
>>
>> Unexpected kernel s
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 03:58:21AM +0100, William Cohen wrote:
> Hi All,
Hi Will,
> I have been experimenting with the patches for arm64 kprobes support.
> On occasion the kernel gets stuck in a loop printing output:
>
> Unexpected kernel single-step exception at EL1
>
> This message by itself
On 04/21/15 07:42, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> (2015/04/21 5:19), David Long wrote:
>> From: "David A. Long"
>>
>> This patchset is heavily based on Sandeepa Prabhu's ARM v8 kprobes patches,
>> first seen in October 2013. This version attempts to address concerns raised
>> by
>> reviewers and also
Hi All,
I have been experimenting with the patches for arm64 kprobes support.
On occasion the kernel gets stuck in a loop printing output:
Unexpected kernel single-step exception at EL1
This message by itself is not that enlighten. I added the attached
patch to get some additional information
On 04/21/2015 07:42 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> (2015/04/21 5:19), David Long wrote:
>> From: "David A. Long"
>>
>> This patchset is heavily based on Sandeepa Prabhu's ARM v8 kprobes patches,
>> first seen in October 2013. This version attempts to address concerns raised
>> by
>> reviewers and
On 04/21/2015 07:42 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> (2015/04/21 5:19), David Long wrote:
>> From: "David A. Long"
>>
>> This patchset is heavily based on Sandeepa Prabhu's ARM v8 kprobes patches,
>> first seen in October 2013. This version attempts to address concerns raised
>> by
>> reviewers and
(2015/04/21 5:19), David Long wrote:
> From: "David A. Long"
>
> This patchset is heavily based on Sandeepa Prabhu's ARM v8 kprobes patches,
> first seen in October 2013. This version attempts to address concerns raised
> by
> reviewers and also fixes problems discovered during testing.
>
> Thi
20 matches
Mail list logo
