[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181213100816.GC5307@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 11:08:16 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@...g.org>,
Eugene Syromyatnikov <esyr@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] perf: Allow to block process in syscall tracepoints
On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 11:01:49AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> - the wakeups side is icky; the best I can come up with is making the
> data page R/O and single stepping on write fault, but that isn't
> multi-threading safe.
We can emulate the instruction, that would actually work and be thread
safe. Just a small matter of decoding and interpreting any possible
write instruction ;-)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists