[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Yjm+TmKyO+HDOBgN@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 13:17:18 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
rostedt@...dmis.org, ast@...nel.org, hjl.tools@...il.com,
rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com, rppt@...nel.org,
linux-toolchains@...r.kernel.org, Andrew.Cooper3@...rix.com,
ndesaulniers@...gle.com
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the tip tree
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 02:31:36PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > But I still think it's fairly terrible to get a (flawed) carbon copy of
> > the kretprobe code.
>
> Indeed. I would like to replace the trampoline code of kretprobe with
> rethook, eventually. There is no reason why we keep the clone.
> (But I need more arch maintainers help for that, there are too many
> archs implemented kretprobes)
CONFIG_KPROBE_ON_RETHOOK - and then implement archs one by one?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists