[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53315ACA.2070203@hitachi.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 19:30:34 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Sandeepa Prabhu <sandeepa.prabhu@...aro.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, x86@...nel.org,
fche@...hat.com, mingo@...hat.com, systemtap@...rceware.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip v8 19/26] kprobes: Show blacklist entries via debugfs
(2014/03/25 5:19), Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Mar 2014 21:00:56 +0900
> Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com> wrote:
>
>
>> kernel/kprobes.c | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>> 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c
>> index a21b4e6..3214289 100644
>> --- a/kernel/kprobes.c
>> +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c
>> @@ -2249,6 +2249,46 @@ static const struct file_operations debugfs_kprobes_operations = {
>> .release = seq_release,
>> };
>>
>> +/* kprobes/blacklist -- shows which functions can not be probed */
>> +static void *kprobe_blacklist_seq_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *pos)
>> +{
>> + return seq_list_start(&kprobe_blacklist, *pos);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void *kprobe_blacklist_seq_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos)
>> +{
>> + return seq_list_next(v, &kprobe_blacklist, pos);
>> +}
>> +
>
> Can modules use NOKPROBE_SYMBOL() and have items being added to the
> list as this is being read? That is, do we need locks?
At this point, no, the NOKPROBE_SYMBOL()s in module are just ignored.
> Also, are items removed. I need to go back and look at the
> implementation of NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(), I'm just writing this as I think
> about it ;-)
Actually, I've introduced a lock with module NOKPROBE_SYMBOL() support in
the next patch. :)
I'd like to split it because module blacklist support involves module
subsystem update.
Thank you!
--
Masami HIRAMATSU
IT Management Research Dept. Linux Technology Center
Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory
E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com
--
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