On 01/05, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
>
> On Mon,  4 Jan 2010 13:11:47 -0800 (PST)
> Roland McGrath <rol...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > > This probably means that copy_process()->user_disable_single_step()
> > > is not enough to clear the "this task wants single-stepping" copied
> > > from parent.
> >
> > I would suspect s390's TIF_SINGLE_STEP flag here.  That flag means "a
> > single-step trap occurred".  This is what causes do_single_step to be
> > called before returning to user mode, rather than the machine trap doing it
> > directly as is done in the other arch implementations.
>
> Just my thinking as well.

Oh, I am not sure. But I don't understand TIF_SINGLE_STEP on s390,
absolutely.

For example, why do_signal() sets TIF_SINGLE_STEP? Why can't we do

        --- a/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
        +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/signal.c
        @@ -500,18 +500,10 @@ void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs)
                                        clear_thread_flag(TIF_RESTORE_SIGMASK);
         
                                /*
        -                        * If we would have taken a single-step trap
        -                        * for a normal instruction, act like we took
        -                        * one for the handler setup.
        -                        */
        -                       if (current->thread.per_info.single_step)
        -                               set_thread_flag(TIF_SINGLE_STEP);
        -
        -                       /*
                                 * Let tracing know that we've done the handler 
setup.
                                 */
                                tracehook_signal_handler(signr, &info, &ka, 
regs,
        -                                        
test_thread_flag(TIF_SINGLE_STEP));
        +                                       
current->thread.per_info.single_step);
                        }
                        return;
                }

?

Apart from arch/s390/signal.c, TIF_SINGLE_STEP is used by entry.S
but I don't understand this asm at all.

Anyway. I modified the debugging patch a bit:

--- K/arch/s390/kernel/traps.c~ 2009-12-22 10:41:52.909174198 -0500
+++ K/arch/s390/kernel/traps.c  2010-01-05 09:49:19.541792379 -0500
@@ -384,6 +384,8 @@ void __kprobes do_single_step(struct pt_
        }
        if (tracehook_consider_fatal_signal(current, SIGTRAP))
                force_sig(SIGTRAP, current);
+       else
+               printk("XXX: %d %d\n", current->pid, 
test_thread_flag(TIF_SINGLE_STEP));
 }
 
 static void default_trap_handler(struct pt_regs * regs, long interruption_code)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, when I run this test-case

        #include <stdio.h>
        #include <unistd.h>
        #include <signal.h>
        #include <sys/ptrace.h>
        #include <sys/wait.h>
        #include <assert.h>

        int main(void)
        {
                int pid, status;

                if (!(pid = fork())) {
                        assert(ptrace(PTRACE_TRACEME) == 0);
                        kill(getpid(), SIGSTOP);

                        if (!fork())
                                return 43;

                        wait(&status);
                        return WEXITSTATUS(status);
                }


                for (;;) {
                        assert(pid == wait(&status));
                        if (WIFEXITED(status))
                                break;
                        assert(ptrace(PTRACE_SINGLESTEP, pid, 0,0) == 0);
                }

                assert(WEXITSTATUS(status) == 43);
                return 0;
        }

dmesg shows 799 lines of

        XXX: 2389 0


The kernel is 2.6.32.2 + utrace, but CONFIG_UTRACE is not set.

Oleg.

Reply via email to