[for-next][PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate ->utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2014-01-02 Thread Steven Rostedt
From: Oleg Nesterov uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to do this. current->utask looks like a natural place to hold this info, but we need to allocate it before handler_chain(). This is a bit

[for-next][PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate -utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2014-01-02 Thread Steven Rostedt
From: Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to do this. current-utask looks like a natural place to hold this info, but we need to allocate it before handler_chain().

[PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate ->utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-15 Thread Namhyung Kim
From: Oleg Nesterov uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to do this. current->utask looks like a natural place to hold this info, but we need to allocate it before handler_chain(). This is a bit

[PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate -utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-15 Thread Namhyung Kim
From: Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to do this. current-utask looks like a natural place to hold this info, but we need to allocate it before handler_chain().

Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate ->utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-12 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
(2013/12/09 15:20), Namhyung Kim wrote: > From: Oleg Nesterov > > uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional > info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to do this. > > current->utask looks like a natural place to hold this info, but we need >

Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate ->utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-12 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
(2013/12/13 4:46), Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 12/12, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: >> >> (2013/12/12 3:11), Oleg Nesterov wrote: >>> On 12/11, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: But it could skip the handler_chain silently. It could confuse users why their probe doesn't hit as expected. >>> >>> No,

Re: Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate ->utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-12 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 12/12, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > (2013/12/12 3:11), Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 12/11, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > >> > >> But it could skip the handler_chain silently. It could confuse users > >> why their probe doesn't hit as expected. > > > > No, we will restart the same (probed)

Re: Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate -utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-12 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 12/12, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: (2013/12/12 3:11), Oleg Nesterov wrote: On 12/11, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: But it could skip the handler_chain silently. It could confuse users why their probe doesn't hit as expected. No, we will restart the same (probed) instruction, handle_swbp()

Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate -utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-12 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
(2013/12/09 15:20), Namhyung Kim wrote: From: Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to do this. current-utask looks like a natural place to hold this info, but we

Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate -utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-12 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
(2013/12/13 4:46), Oleg Nesterov wrote: On 12/12, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: (2013/12/12 3:11), Oleg Nesterov wrote: On 12/11, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: But it could skip the handler_chain silently. It could confuse users why their probe doesn't hit as expected. No, we will restart the same

Re: Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate ->utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-11 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
(2013/12/12 3:11), Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 12/11, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: >> >> (2013/12/11 0:57), Oleg Nesterov wrote: >>> On 12/10, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: and isn't it better to increment miss-hit counter of the uprobe? >>> >>> What do you mean? This is not miss-hit and ->utask

Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate ->utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-11 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 12/11, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > (2013/12/11 0:57), Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 12/10, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > >> > >> and isn't it better to increment > >> miss-hit counter of the uprobe? > > > > What do you mean? This is not miss-hit and ->utask == NULL is quite normal. > > But it could

Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate -utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-11 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 12/11, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: (2013/12/11 0:57), Oleg Nesterov wrote: On 12/10, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: and isn't it better to increment miss-hit counter of the uprobe? What do you mean? This is not miss-hit and -utask == NULL is quite normal. But it could skip the

Re: Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate -utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-11 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
(2013/12/12 3:11), Oleg Nesterov wrote: On 12/11, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: (2013/12/11 0:57), Oleg Nesterov wrote: On 12/10, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: and isn't it better to increment miss-hit counter of the uprobe? What do you mean? This is not miss-hit and -utask == NULL is quite normal.

Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate ->utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-10 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
(2013/12/11 0:57), Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 12/10, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: >> >> (2013/12/09 15:20), Namhyung Kim wrote: >>> From: Oleg Nesterov >>> >>> uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional >>> info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to

Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate ->utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-10 Thread Namhyung Kim
Hi Oleg, On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 16:57:44 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 12/10, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: >> >> (2013/12/09 15:20), Namhyung Kim wrote: >> > From: Oleg Nesterov >> > >> > uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional >> > info to call_fetch() methods,

Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate ->utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-10 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 12/10, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > (2013/12/09 15:20), Namhyung Kim wrote: > > From: Oleg Nesterov > > > > uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional > > info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to do this. > > > > current->utask looks like a

Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate ->utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-10 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
(2013/12/09 15:20), Namhyung Kim wrote: > From: Oleg Nesterov > > uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional > info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to do this. > > current->utask looks like a natural place to hold this info, but we need >

Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate -utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-10 Thread Namhyung Kim
Hi Oleg, On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 16:57:44 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: On 12/10, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: (2013/12/09 15:20), Namhyung Kim wrote: From: Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional info to call_fetch() methods,

Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate -utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-10 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
(2013/12/11 0:57), Oleg Nesterov wrote: On 12/10, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: (2013/12/09 15:20), Namhyung Kim wrote: From: Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to do

Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate -utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-10 Thread Masami Hiramatsu
(2013/12/09 15:20), Namhyung Kim wrote: From: Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to do this. current-utask looks like a natural place to hold this info, but we

Re: [PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate -utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-10 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 12/10, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: (2013/12/09 15:20), Namhyung Kim wrote: From: Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to do this. current-utask looks like a

[PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate ->utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-08 Thread Namhyung Kim
From: Oleg Nesterov uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to do this. current->utask looks like a natural place to hold this info, but we need to allocate it before handler_chain(). This is a bit

[PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate -utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-12-08 Thread Namhyung Kim
From: Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to do this. current-utask looks like a natural place to hold this info, but we need to allocate it before handler_chain().

[PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate ->utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-11-26 Thread Namhyung Kim
From: Oleg Nesterov uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to do this. current->utask looks like a natural place to hold this info, but we need to allocate it before handler_chain(). This is a bit

[PATCH 16/17] uprobes: Allocate -utask before handler_chain() for tracing handlers

2013-11-26 Thread Namhyung Kim
From: Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com uprobe_trace_print() and uprobe_perf_print() need to pass the additional info to call_fetch() methods, currently there is no simple way to do this. current-utask looks like a natural place to hold this info, but we need to allocate it before handler_chain().