On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 12:21:49PM +0530, Srinivasa Ds wrote:
>
> When I was testing kprobes on x86_64 and I come across the below error
> message
> on latest 2.6.23-rc1 kernel.
> ==
> Trying to vfree() bad address (c20002233199)
> WARNING: at
On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 12:21:49PM +0530, Srinivasa Ds wrote:
When I was testing kprobes on x86_64 and I come across the below error
message
on latest 2.6.23-rc1 kernel.
==
Trying to vfree() bad address (c20002233199)
WARNING: at
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 12:38:22PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Kprobes can use the text edit lock to insure mutual exclusion when edition the
> code and make sure the pages are writable.
Linus suggested for splitting ro-data and ro-text; And allow ro-text
only if kprobes is not configured.
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 12:38:22PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
Kprobes can use the text edit lock to insure mutual exclusion when edition the
code and make sure the pages are writable.
Linus suggested for splitting ro-data and ro-text; And allow ro-text
only if kprobes is not configured.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 10:23:21PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 16:50 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 20 Jun 2007, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > >
> > > the real fix would be something like this instead:
> >
> > If people can test this, and confirm it works,
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 10:23:21PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 16:50 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2007, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
the real fix would be something like this instead:
If people can test this, and confirm it works, please send a
On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 06:44:30AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 09:30 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > * Arjan van de Ven ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 15:38 +0530, S. P. Prasanna wrote:
> > > > This patch is a
This patch is a quick fix for x86_64 to enable kprobes only if DEBUG_RODATA is
not configured. Since DEBUG_RODATA markes the kernel text pages as read-only.
Signed-off-by: Prasanna S P. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
arch/x86_64/Kconfig |6 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 09:32:56PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Monday 18 June 2007 20:56:32 Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:44:57 -0400
> > Chuck Ebbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > I fancy it's done by the kprobe_page_fault handler, but I do not see
> > > > clearly
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 09:32:56PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Monday 18 June 2007 20:56:32 Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:44:57 -0400
Chuck Ebbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I fancy it's done by the kprobe_page_fault handler, but I do not see
clearly how writing the
This patch is a quick fix for x86_64 to enable kprobes only if DEBUG_RODATA is
not configured. Since DEBUG_RODATA markes the kernel text pages as read-only.
Signed-off-by: Prasanna S P. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
arch/x86_64/Kconfig |6 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff
On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 06:44:30AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 09:30 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
* Arjan van de Ven ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 15:38 +0530, S. P. Prasanna wrote:
This patch is a quick fix for x86_64 to enable kprobes only
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 01:43:04AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Allow gcc to perform show_registers() type checking also with
> CONFIG_KPROBES=n.
>
Adrian,
Please implement it as Andrew suggested, when this was patch was posted
eariler. Refer this discussion thread below.
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 01:43:04AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
Allow gcc to perform show_registers() type checking also with
CONFIG_KPROBES=n.
Adrian,
Please implement it as Andrew suggested, when this was patch was posted
eariler. Refer this discussion thread below.
This patch fixes the problem of page protection introduced by
CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA for x86_64 architecture. As per Andi
Kleen's suggestion, the kernel text pages are marked writeable
only for a short duration to insert or remove the breakpoints.
Signed-off-by: Prasanna S P<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 11:12:32AM +1200, Ian McDonald wrote:
> On 6/7/07, Chuck Ebbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On 06/06/2007 04:47 PM, Ian McDonald wrote:
> >> Hi there,
> >>
> >> We've seen a report of a problem with dccp_probe as shown below. The
> >> user has also verified that it occurs
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 11:12:32AM +1200, Ian McDonald wrote:
On 6/7/07, Chuck Ebbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/06/2007 04:47 PM, Ian McDonald wrote:
Hi there,
We've seen a report of a problem with dccp_probe as shown below. The
user has also verified that it occurs in tcp_probe as
This patch fixes the problem of page protection introduced by
CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA for x86_64 architecture. As per Andi
Kleen's suggestion, the kernel text pages are marked writeable
only for a short duration to insert or remove the breakpoints.
Signed-off-by: Prasanna S P[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 03:35:13PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> Going back to something you mentioned earlier...
>
[...]
> On Fri, 9 Feb 2007, Roland McGrath wrote:
> There are two things I am uncertain about: vm86 mode and kprobes. I don't
> know anything about how either of them works. Judging
On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 03:35:13PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
Going back to something you mentioned earlier...
[...]
On Fri, 9 Feb 2007, Roland McGrath wrote:
There are two things I am uncertain about: vm86 mode and kprobes. I don't
know anything about how either of them works. Judging from
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 04:27:40PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have looked at kprobes code and have some questions for you. I would really
> like to use it to patch dynamically my marker immediate value by doing code
> patching. Using an int3 seems like the right way to handle
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 04:27:40PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
Hi,
I have looked at kprobes code and have some questions for you. I would really
like to use it to patch dynamically my marker immediate value by doing code
patching. Using an int3 seems like the right way to handle this wrt
On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 01:00:08PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> Has the kwatch patch (hardware watchpooint debugging for x86) been updated
> to the current kernel? Is it available anywhere?
Hi Alan,
On Sun, Jan 07,
On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 01:00:08PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
Has the kwatch patch (hardware watchpooint debugging for x86) been updated
to the current kernel? Is it available anywhere?
Hi Alan,
On Sun, Jan 07, 2007
24 matches
Mail list logo
