[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130228200117.GA9074@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 21:01:17 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Anton Arapov <anton@...hat.com>
Cc: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Josh Stone <jistone@...hat.com>,
Frank Eigler <fche@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 3/6] uretprobes: generalize xol_get_insn_slot()
Anton, I'll try to read this series asap. Just one note,
On 02/28, Anton Arapov wrote:
>
> Generalize xol_take_insn_slot() to enable more consumers of the
> function, e.g. trampoline implementation for return probes.
Yes, this is can work too.
But I guess you misunderstood me, or I missed something...
Why do you need xol_area->rp_trampoline_vaddr at all? From the very
beginning I am trying to suggest to use the first slot for trampoline:
Or. Perhaps even better, do not add this helper at all. xol_alloc_area()
could reserve the first slot/bit for trampoline. And note that in this
case we do not need xol_area->rp_trampoline_vaddr, it is always equal
to xol_area->vaddr.
Doesn't this look simpler?
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