[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120830151146.GA26769@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 17:11:46 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
stan_shebs@...tor.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] x86/uprobes: implement x86 specific
arch_uprobe_*_step
On 08/30, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 04:37:24PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > So. We can add "weak arch_uprobe" hooks, fix x86, and after powerpc is
> > merged change both powerpc and x86 in one patch (remove "weak" hooks
> > and move enable/disable into arch_pre/post_xol).
> >
> > Or. We can apply the patch I sent right now, you can fix powerpc later,
> > when it is merged. This all is for 3.7 anyway, and fixup is trivial.
> >
> > I agree either way. Which way do you prefer?
>
> I prefer fixing both together later, just so nothing breaks while intial
> testing, etc.
OK.
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