| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 18:44:35 -0700 From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> To: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com> CC: acme@...stprotocols.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, namhyung@...nel.org, "yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com" <yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf probe: Allow user to specify address within executable On 12/3/13, 6:22 PM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: >> I figured out what you meant by uprobe_events interface yesterday. If I >> have to go to that interface for even 1 function I would do it for all >> -- from a user perspective it is just simpler to have 1 command to setup >> probes. I would prefer that 1 command be perf-probe. > > Yeah, but in that case, why you don't ask us adding sym->binding == STB_LOCAL > in filter_available_functions? :) I did in a separate email -- you said because there can be multiple local functions with the same name. But local functions is not the only use case I need. For now I will carry the patch locally. At this point I am 20 patches deep and have probably another 20 to go. What's one more. I'll come back to this when I have more time. Thanks, David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists