[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121017173510.GA11019@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 19:35:10 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] uprobes: allow ignoring of probe hits
On 10/16, Rabin Vincent wrote:
>
> 2012/10/15 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>:
> >
> > Not sure I understand why we shouldn't call handlers in this case,
> > but OK, I know nothing about arm.
>
> This old discussion about kprobes should be useful:
>
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2011-March/045755.html
Thanks... Not sure I understand this discussion...
And, to clarify, I am not arguing. Just curious.
So, is this like cmov on x86? And this patch allows to not report if
the condition is not true? Or there are other issues on arm?
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