On Wed, 6 Jun 2018 14:03:37 +0530
Ravi Bangoria wrote:
> Why RFC again:
>
> This series is different from earlier versions[1]. Earlier series
> implemented this feature in trace_uprobe while this has implemented
> the logic in core uprobe. Few reasons for this:
> 1. One of the major reason
On Wed, 6 Jun 2018 14:03:37 +0530
Ravi Bangoria wrote:
> Why RFC again:
>
> This series is different from earlier versions[1]. Earlier series
> implemented this feature in trace_uprobe while this has implemented
> the logic in core uprobe. Few reasons for this:
> 1. One of the major reason
Hi Masami,
>>> Hmm, it sounds simple... maybe we can increment refctr in
>>> install_breakpoint/
>>> remove_breakpoint?
>>
>> Not really, it would be simpler if I can put it inside install_breakpoint().
>> Consider an mmap() case. Probed instruction resides in the text section
>> whereas
>>
Hi Masami,
>>> Hmm, it sounds simple... maybe we can increment refctr in
>>> install_breakpoint/
>>> remove_breakpoint?
>>
>> Not really, it would be simpler if I can put it inside install_breakpoint().
>> Consider an mmap() case. Probed instruction resides in the text section
>> whereas
>>
Hi Oleg,
On 06/08/2018 10:06 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am travelling till the end of the next week, can't read this version
> until I return. Just one question,
>
> On 06/06, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
>>
>> 1. One of the major reason was the deadlock between uprobe_lock and
>>
Hi Oleg,
On 06/08/2018 10:06 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am travelling till the end of the next week, can't read this version
> until I return. Just one question,
>
> On 06/06, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
>>
>> 1. One of the major reason was the deadlock between uprobe_lock and
>>
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 12:04:25 +0530
Ravi Bangoria wrote:
> Hi Masami,
>
> >> So for kernel modules,
> >>
> >> is it fine to change current ABI from
> >> uprobe_register(inode, offset, consumer)
> >> to
> >> uprobe_register(inode, offset, ref_ctr_offset, consumer)
> >>
> >> Or I should
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 12:04:25 +0530
Ravi Bangoria wrote:
> Hi Masami,
>
> >> So for kernel modules,
> >>
> >> is it fine to change current ABI from
> >> uprobe_register(inode, offset, consumer)
> >> to
> >> uprobe_register(inode, offset, ref_ctr_offset, consumer)
> >>
> >> Or I should
Why RFC again:
This series is different from earlier versions[1]. Earlier series
implemented this feature in trace_uprobe while this has implemented
the logic in core uprobe. Few reasons for this:
1. One of the major reason was the deadlock between uprobe_lock and
mm->mmap inside
Why RFC again:
This series is different from earlier versions[1]. Earlier series
implemented this feature in trace_uprobe while this has implemented
the logic in core uprobe. Few reasons for this:
1. One of the major reason was the deadlock between uprobe_lock and
mm->mmap inside
10 matches
Mail list logo
