[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <523661EA.9040500@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 09:42:02 +0800
From: Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@...wei.com>
To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
CC: <benh@...nel.crashing.org>, <rob@...dley.net>, <ananth@...ibm.com>,
<anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
<masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: fix some typos
On 2013/9/15 0:49, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 09/13/13 20:49, Xishi Qiu wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/kprobes.txt b/Documentation/kprobes.txt
>> index 0cfb00f..ca278d5 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/kprobes.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/kprobes.txt
>> @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ stack contents as the probed function. When it is done, the handler
>> calls jprobe_return(), which traps again to restore the original stack
>> contents and processor state and switch to the probed function.
>>
>> -By convention, the callee owns its arguments, so gcc may produce code
>
> Are you sure about that?
> It looks correct to me (before the patch).
>
Hi Randy, you are right, I confused caller and callee.
Thanks,
Xishi Qiu
>> +By convention, the caller owns its arguments, so gcc may produce code
>> that unexpectedly modifies that portion of the stack. This is why
>> Kprobes saves a copy of the stack and restores it after the jprobe
>> handler has run. Up to MAX_STACK_SIZE bytes are copied -- e.g.,
>>
>
>
--
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