There is no particular reason why you can't have a watchpoint in TCG
that covers a large chunk of the address space. We could be clever
about it but these cases are pretty rare and we can assume the user
will expect a little performance degradation.
NB: In my testing gdb will silently squash a watchpoint like:
watch (char[0x7fffffffff]) *0x0
to a 4 byte watchpoint. Practically it will limit the maximum size
based on max-value-size. However given enough of a tweak the sky is
the limit.
Reported-by: Alexander Bulekov <alxndr@bu.edu>
Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
---
v2
- use cleaner in_page = -(addr | TARGET_PAGE_MASK) logic per rth
---
exec.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/exec.c b/exec.c
index 5162f0d12f9..65a4376df37 100644
--- a/exec.c
+++ b/exec.c
@@ -1036,6 +1036,7 @@ int cpu_watchpoint_insert(CPUState *cpu, vaddr addr, vaddr len,
int flags, CPUWatchpoint **watchpoint)
{
CPUWatchpoint *wp;
+ vaddr in_page;
/* forbid ranges which are empty or run off the end of the address space */
if (len == 0 || (addr + len - 1) < addr) {
@@ -1056,7 +1057,12 @@ int cpu_watchpoint_insert(CPUState *cpu, vaddr addr, vaddr len,
QTAILQ_INSERT_TAIL(&cpu->watchpoints, wp, entry);
}
- tlb_flush_page(cpu, addr);
+ in_page = -(addr | TARGET_PAGE_MASK);
+ if (len <= in_page) {
+ tlb_flush_page(cpu, addr);
+ } else {
+ tlb_flush(cpu);
+ }
if (watchpoint)
*watchpoint = wp;
--
2.20.1
On 6/3/20 1:24 PM, Alex Bennée wrote:
> There is no particular reason why you can't have a watchpoint in TCG
> that covers a large chunk of the address space. We could be clever
> about it but these cases are pretty rare and we can assume the user
> will expect a little performance degradation.
>
> NB: In my testing gdb will silently squash a watchpoint like:
>
> watch (char[0x7fffffffff]) *0x0
>
> to a 4 byte watchpoint. Practically it will limit the maximum size
> based on max-value-size. However given enough of a tweak the sky is
> the limit.
>
> Reported-by: Alexander Bulekov <alxndr@bu.edu>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
>
> ---
> v2
> - use cleaner in_page = -(addr | TARGET_PAGE_MASK) logic per rth
Can we have a macro for this?
Maybe QEMU_IN_PAGE_OFFSET(addr, TARGET_PAGE_MASK)?
or QEMU_OFFSET_IN_PAGE()...
> ---
> exec.c | 8 +++++++-
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/exec.c b/exec.c
> index 5162f0d12f9..65a4376df37 100644
> --- a/exec.c
> +++ b/exec.c
> @@ -1036,6 +1036,7 @@ int cpu_watchpoint_insert(CPUState *cpu, vaddr addr, vaddr len,
> int flags, CPUWatchpoint **watchpoint)
> {
> CPUWatchpoint *wp;
> + vaddr in_page;
>
> /* forbid ranges which are empty or run off the end of the address space */
> if (len == 0 || (addr + len - 1) < addr) {
> @@ -1056,7 +1057,12 @@ int cpu_watchpoint_insert(CPUState *cpu, vaddr addr, vaddr len,
> QTAILQ_INSERT_TAIL(&cpu->watchpoints, wp, entry);
> }
>
> - tlb_flush_page(cpu, addr);
> + in_page = -(addr | TARGET_PAGE_MASK);
> + if (len <= in_page) {
> + tlb_flush_page(cpu, addr);
> + } else {
> + tlb_flush(cpu);
> + }
>
> if (watchpoint)
> *watchpoint = wp;
>
On 6/3/20 2:46 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 6/3/20 1:24 PM, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> There is no particular reason why you can't have a watchpoint in TCG
>> that covers a large chunk of the address space. We could be clever
>> about it but these cases are pretty rare and we can assume the user
>> will expect a little performance degradation.
>>
>> NB: In my testing gdb will silently squash a watchpoint like:
>>
>> watch (char[0x7fffffffff]) *0x0
>>
>> to a 4 byte watchpoint. Practically it will limit the maximum size
>> based on max-value-size. However given enough of a tweak the sky is
>> the limit.
>>
>> Reported-by: Alexander Bulekov <alxndr@bu.edu>
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
>>
>> ---
>> v2
>> - use cleaner in_page = -(addr | TARGET_PAGE_MASK) logic per rth
>
> Can we have a macro for this?
> Maybe QEMU_IN_PAGE_OFFSET(addr, TARGET_PAGE_MASK)?
> or QEMU_OFFSET_IN_PAGE()...
As this is queued, I suppose the implicit answer is "no."
>
>> ---
>> exec.c | 8 +++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/exec.c b/exec.c
>> index 5162f0d12f9..65a4376df37 100644
>> --- a/exec.c
>> +++ b/exec.c
>> @@ -1036,6 +1036,7 @@ int cpu_watchpoint_insert(CPUState *cpu, vaddr addr, vaddr len,
>> int flags, CPUWatchpoint **watchpoint)
>> {
>> CPUWatchpoint *wp;
>> + vaddr in_page;
>>
>> /* forbid ranges which are empty or run off the end of the address space */
>> if (len == 0 || (addr + len - 1) < addr) {
>> @@ -1056,7 +1057,12 @@ int cpu_watchpoint_insert(CPUState *cpu, vaddr addr, vaddr len,
>> QTAILQ_INSERT_TAIL(&cpu->watchpoints, wp, entry);
>> }
>>
>> - tlb_flush_page(cpu, addr);
>> + in_page = -(addr | TARGET_PAGE_MASK);
>> + if (len <= in_page) {
>> + tlb_flush_page(cpu, addr);
>> + } else {
>> + tlb_flush(cpu);
>> + }
>>
>> if (watchpoint)
>> *watchpoint = wp;
>>
>
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> writes: > On 6/3/20 2:46 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >> On 6/3/20 1:24 PM, Alex Bennée wrote: >>> There is no particular reason why you can't have a watchpoint in TCG >>> that covers a large chunk of the address space. We could be clever >>> about it but these cases are pretty rare and we can assume the user >>> will expect a little performance degradation. >>> >>> NB: In my testing gdb will silently squash a watchpoint like: >>> >>> watch (char[0x7fffffffff]) *0x0 >>> >>> to a 4 byte watchpoint. Practically it will limit the maximum size >>> based on max-value-size. However given enough of a tweak the sky is >>> the limit. >>> >>> Reported-by: Alexander Bulekov <alxndr@bu.edu> >>> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> >>> >>> --- >>> v2 >>> - use cleaner in_page = -(addr | TARGET_PAGE_MASK) logic per rth >> >> Can we have a macro for this? >> Maybe QEMU_IN_PAGE_OFFSET(addr, TARGET_PAGE_MASK)? >> or QEMU_OFFSET_IN_PAGE()... > > As this is queued, I suppose the implicit answer is "no." Richard took it into tcg/next as is. I think having a macro may well be nice clean-up but I struggled to pick a good include location so left it for a future clean-up series ;-) -- Alex Bennée
On 6/3/20 4:24 AM, Alex Bennée wrote: > There is no particular reason why you can't have a watchpoint in TCG > that covers a large chunk of the address space. We could be clever > about it but these cases are pretty rare and we can assume the user > will expect a little performance degradation. > > NB: In my testing gdb will silently squash a watchpoint like: > > watch (char[0x7fffffffff]) *0x0 > > to a 4 byte watchpoint. Practically it will limit the maximum size > based on max-value-size. However given enough of a tweak the sky is > the limit. > > Reported-by: Alexander Bulekov <alxndr@bu.edu> > Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> > > --- > v2 > - use cleaner in_page = -(addr | TARGET_PAGE_MASK) logic per rth > --- > exec.c | 8 +++++++- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org> Queued to tcg-next. r~
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.