[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110127065032.GQ19725@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 12:20:32 +0530
From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
SystemTap <systemtap@...rces.redhat.com>,
Linux-mm <linux-mm@...r.kernel.org>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 2.6.37-rc5-tip 16/20] 16: uprobes: register a
notifier for uprobes.
* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> [2011-01-25 14:56:18]:
> On Thu, 2010-12-16 at 15:30 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > Uprobe needs to be intimated on int3 and singlestep exceptions.
> > Hence uprobes registers a die notifier so that its notified of the events.
>
> Why isn't this part of the previous patch? This splitup really doesn't
> make sense.
The die notifier which is introduced in patch 15 is arch dependent
(i.e x86). Whereever possible I have kept the arch dependent parts
separate from the arch independent parts so that porting to
another architecture becomes easier and clear.
--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar
--
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