[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120601155312.GA20265@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 17:53:12 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Anton Arapov <anton@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] uprobes: install_breakpoint() should fail if
is_swbp_insn() == T
On 05/31, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> __find_next_vma_info() checks tmpvi->mm == vma->vm_mm to detect the
> already visited mm/vma. However, afaics this can be false positive?
Yes, but I guess this is harmless, we can rely on uprobe_mmap.
But. Doesn't this mean we can greatly simplify register_for_each_vma()
and make it O(n) ?
Unless I missed something, we can simply create the list of
mm/vaddr structures under ->i_mmap_mutex (vma_prio_tree_foreach), then
register_for_each_vma() can process the list and that is all.
If another mapping comes after we drop i_mmap_mutex, uprobe_mmap()
should be called and it should install the bp.
Srikar, Peter, what do you think?
Oleg.
--
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