[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090330153656.GF6411@in.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 21:06:56 +0530
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
systemtap-ml <systemtap@...rces.redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip 3/4 V3] tracing: kprobe-tracer plugin supports
arguments
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 11:32:16AM -0400, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 06:59:30PM -0400, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> >
> >> +/* TODO: Move these functions to arch/XXX/include/asm/debugger.h */
> >> +
> >
> > Maybe arch/xxx/lib/<>.c too?
> >
> > I know its on your list of TODOs but I'd prefer to have an
> > arch_fetch_func_args() or somesuch in arch specific code, to start with.
> > It is trivial to implement the argument extraction code on certain
> > architectures and such a helper would be great.
>
> Hmm, I think fetch_* functions are more general framework, but
> it's true that some of their implementation depend on architecture.
> Thus, I'd prefer to separate some of basic implementaions(get_stack_nth,
> get_argument_nth) from fetch_* and move it to arch/xxx/include/asm/ptrace.h,
> because there are similar inline functions.
> What would you think about this?
I don't really have an opinion on the nomenclature as long as there is a
clear arch specific callout that doesn't need to touch arch agnostic
files.
Ananth
--
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