[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BA77A86.2040109@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 10:11:18 -0400
From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/10] Move Macro W to insn.h
Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> * Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com> [2010-03-20 11:50:06]:
>
>> Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
>>> Move Macro W to asm/insn.h
>>>
>>> Macro W used to know if the instructions are valid for
>>> user-space/kernel space. This macro is used by kprobes and
>>> user_bkpt. (i.e user space breakpoint assistance layer.) So moving it
>>> to a common header file asm/insn.h.
>>
>> Hmm, I don't think this shortest macro name is good to expose
>> commonly... And also, since we already have inat (instruction
>> attribute) table, we'd better expand an inat bit to indicate
>> which instruction can be probed/boosted.
>>
>
> Guess we would need three bits,
> - Instruction can be probed in kernel.
Currently, we don't have any maps for this bit.
> - Instruction can be probed in user space.
> - Instruction can be boosted.
Other two bits are ok for me :)
Thank you,
>
> Or do you have other ideas?
>
> --
> Thanks and Regards
> Srikar
--
Masami Hiramatsu
e-mail: mhiramat@...hat.com
--
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