[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180518062343.GC27960@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 08:23:43 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, x86@...nel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip v3 0/7] kprobes: x86: Cleanup jprobe implementation
on x86
* Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:
> x86: kprobes: Remove jprobe implementation
> x86: kprobes: Ignore break_handler
> x86: kprobes: Do not disable preempt on int3 path
So this is another annoyance. Do you ever compare the changelogs and titles you
write with the ones I actually commit? They are almost never the same, for example
the titles to x86 level kprobes code are always trying to use this kind of prefix:
b664d57f39d0: kprobes/x86: Remove IRQ disabling from jprobe handlers
ee213fc72fd6: kprobes/x86: Set up frame pointer in kprobe trampoline
a19b2e3d7839: kprobes/x86: Remove IRQ disabling from ftrace-based/optimized kprobes
5bb4fc2d8641: kprobes/x86: Disable preemption in ftrace-based jprobes
9a09f261a4fa: kprobes/x86: Disable preemption in optprobe
cd52edad55fb: kprobes/x86: Move the get_kprobe_ctlblk() into irq-disabled block
a8976fc84b64: kprobes/x86: Remove addressof() operators
Not "x86: kprobes:" which is the wrong order anyway...
Could you please be more careful about all this in the future?
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists