linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/17] tracing/probes: Move 'symbol' fetch method to kprobes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20131219091830.5719b195@gandalf.local.home>
Date:	Thu, 19 Dec 2013 09:18:30 -0500
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Hyeoncheol Lee <cheol.lee@....com>,
	"zhangwei\(Jovi\)" <jovi.zhangwei@...wei.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
	Hemant Kumar <hkshaw@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/17] tracing/probes: Move 'symbol' fetch method to
 kprobes

On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:34:09 +0900
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> wrote:

> Hi Steve,
> 
> On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 15:23:38 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 13:32:09 +0900
> > Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> >> index 5395d37e5e72..adc9ac70fd3c 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
> >> @@ -115,6 +115,14 @@ DEFINE_BASIC_FETCH_FUNCS(stack)
> >>  #define fetch_stack_string_size	NULL
> >>  
> >>  
> >> +/* uprobes don't support symbol fetch methods */
> >
> > "uprobes does not support symbol fetch methods"
> 
> I was confused since the "uprobes" looks like a plural..
> 

Heh, yeah I guess it can be. I was thinking of it as singular. I was
thinking of ftrace, perf, kprobes, uprobes, all being the same. As in
"kprobes system" or "uprobes system". I implicitly added in my mind
"system" to that sentence.

 uprobes (system) does not support fetch methods

But I guess one can think of it as each individual uprobe does not
support fetch methods, so "uprobes do not support fetch methods" would
then be correct.

But still, I would use the full "do not" as the "don't" here just
sounds funny to me (sounds like a boxer talking "Dey don't do dat to
me! Dey don't support fetch methods either!")

-- Steve
--
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/