[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110610055648.GA22707@in.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 11:26:48 +0530
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...k.frob.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3.0-rc2-tip 0/22] 0: Uprobes patchset with perf
probe support
On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 08:42:24PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 18:28 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > - Breakpoint handling should co-exist with singlestep/blockstep from
> > another tracer/debugger.
> > - Queue and dequeue signals delivered from the singlestep till
> > completion of postprocessing.
>
> These two are important to sort before we can think of merging this
> right?
Yup.
Guess Srikar missed updating this part, but the first of the issues
(sstep/blockstep) is now fixed. Signal queueing is a work-in-progress.
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