[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110920181225.GA5149@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:12:25 -0400
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
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>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...k.frob.com>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3.1.0-rc4-tip 8/26] x86: analyze instruction and
determine fixups.
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 06:13:10PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> You've probably thought of this but it would be nice to skip XOL for
> nops. This would be a common case with static probes (e.g. sdt.h) where
> the probe template includes a nop where we can easily plant int $0x3.
Do we now have sdt.h support for uprobes? That's one of the killer
features that always seemed to get postponed.
--
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