[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5016A517.8000702@linutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 17:15:35 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
CC: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...k.frob.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] uprobes: don't enable/disable signle step if the user
did it
On 07/30/2012 04:16 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> I'd suggest you to make 2 patches:
>
> - 1/2 creates arch_uprobe_*_step(...) __weak helpers in
> kernel/events/uprobes.c which simply call
> user_*_single_step() and updates the callers
>
> Not strictly necessary, but imho makes sense...
>
> - 2/2 adds the x86 implementation in arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c
> which still uses user_*_single_step() but checks
> TIF_SINGLESTEP. As your patch does, but you should use
> utask, not uprobe.
>
> IOW, I simply suggest to make your patch x86-specific. Then we
> will try to do more fixes/improvements.
>
>
> Sebastian, Ananth, what do you think?
Yup, let me try…
>
> Oleg.
>
Sebastian
--
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