[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1322128199.2921.3.camel@twins>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 10:49:59 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...k.frob.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Anton Arapov <anton@...hat.com>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
tulasidhard@...il.com
Subject: Re: Fwd: uprobes: register/unregister probes.
On Thu, 2011-11-24 at 12:33 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-11-18 at 16:37 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > > +int register_uprobe(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset,
> > > + struct uprobe_consumer *consumer)
> > > +{
> > > + struct uprobe *uprobe;
> > > + int ret = -EINVAL;
> > > +
> > > + if (!consumer || consumer->next)
> > > + return ret;
> > > +
> > > + inode = igrab(inode);
> >
> > So why are you dealing with !consumer but not with !inode? and why
> > does
> > it make sense to allow !consumer at all?
> >
>
>
> I am not sure if I got your comment correctly.
>
> I do check for inode just after the igrab.
No you don't, you check the return value of igrab(), but you crash hard
when someone calls register_uprobe(.inode=NULL).
> I am actually not dealing with !consumer.
> If the consumer is NULL, then we dont have any handler to run so why
> would we want to register such a probe?
Why allow someone calling register_uprobe(.consumer=NULL) to begin with?
That doesn't make any sense.
> Also if consumer->next is Non-NULL, that means that this consumer was
> already used. Reusing the consumer, can result in consumers list getting
> broken into two.
Yeah, although at that point why be nice about it? Just but a WARN_ON()
in or so.
--
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