Single-stepping with interrupts enabled.
Richard J Moore
richardj_moore@uk.ibm.com
Mon Feb 27 14:05:00 GMT 2006
You can't do without post-handlers. SystemTap might not use them explicitly
but post-handling of the single-step (in kprobes) is required whether or
not a user handler is registered. For example for correcting the outcome of
an instructions execution (certain adjustments may have to be made - E49,
etc..); for handling exceptions from the single-stepped instruction
correctly; for giving the correct 'logical' view at a higher level of a
trace event following the generation of a recoverable page-fault on
single-step; for correcting IF manipulating instructions where the state of
the interrupt flag is not actually as the probed program logically thinks
it is; for correcting the TRAP Flag for the same reasons as IF.
There must be more.
- -
Richard J Moore
IBM Advanced Linux Response Team - Linux Technology Centre
MOBEX: 264807; Mobile (+44) (0)7739-875237
Office: (+44) (0)1962-817072
fche@redhat.com
(Frank Ch.
Eigler) To
Sent by: Richard J Moore/UK/IBM@IBMGB
fche@redhat.com cc
systemtap@sources.redhat.com
bcc
27/02/2006
13:51 Subject
Re: Single-stepping with interrupts
enabled.
richardj_moore wrote:
> [...] The problem is down to the need to save state over the
> single-step, so that pre- and post-processing either side of the
> single-step can be correctly associated with each other. [...]
How much of this would be simplified if we did away with support for
post_handlers (which we don't use in systemtap)?
- FChE
More information about the Systemtap
mailing list