[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1263586731.5007.2.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:18:51 -0800
From: Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
utrace-devel <utrace-devel@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>,
Maneesh Soni <maneesh@...ibm.com>,
Mark Wielaard <mjw@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 3/7] Execution out of line (XOL)
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 10:07 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-01-14 at 14:43 -0800, Jim Keniston wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, there's not a lot of context there. I hope it will make more
> > sense if you read section 1.1 of Documentation/uprobes.txt (patch #6).
> > Or look at get_insn_slot() in kprobes, and understand that we're trying
> > to do something similar in uprobes, where the instruction copies have to
> > reside in the user address space of the probed process.
>
> That's not the point, changelogs shoulnd not be this cryptic. They
> should be stand alone and descriptive of what, why and how.
Point taken.
>
> If you can't be bothered writing such for something you want reviewed
> for inclusion then I might not be bothered looking at them at all.
>
We appreciate your persistence wrt this patch set. :-}
Jim
--
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