[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150108173600.GW11583@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 17:36:00 +0000
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: Pratyush Anand <panand@...hat.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux@....linux.org.uk" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
"tixy@...aro.org" <tixy@...aro.org>,
"ananth@...ibm.com" <ananth@...ibm.com>,
"sandeepa.prabhu@...aro.org" <sandeepa.prabhu@...aro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com" <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>,
"masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com" <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
"wcohen@...hat.com" <wcohen@...hat.com>,
"oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/8] ARM64: Refactor kprobes-arm64
On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 05:33:08PM +0000, Pratyush Anand wrote:
> On Thursday 08 January 2015 10:25 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 03:21:18PM +0000, Pratyush Anand wrote:
> >> Most of the stuff of kprobes-arm64.c can also be used by uprobes.c. So
> >> move all those part to common code area. In the process rename kprobe to
> >> probe whereever possible.
> >>
> >> No functional change.
> >
> > In which case, can you merge this into the kprobes series (which we haven't
> > merged yet)?
> >
>
> Yes, thats why these are just RFCs. I will send next version of uprobe
> only after kprobe patches are accepted into maintainer's tree.
Ok, but it also makes sense to make kprobes refactoring changes *before* the
patches are merged, as that reduces churn in mainline whilst you don't have
any other dependencies.
Will
--
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