Hi Song,
On 07/14/2018 05:20 AM, Song Liu wrote:
>
> Hmm... what happens when we have multiple uprobes sharing the same
> reference counter? It feels equally complicate to me. Or did I miss any
> cases here?
As far as I can think of, it should be handled by default. No special
treatment needed
Hi Song,
On 07/14/2018 05:20 AM, Song Liu wrote:
>
> Hmm... what happens when we have multiple uprobes sharing the same
> reference counter? It feels equally complicate to me. Or did I miss any
> cases here?
As far as I can think of, it should be handled by default. No special
treatment needed
Hi Oleg,
On 07/10/2018 08:55 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Hi Ravi,
>
> On 07/04, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
>>
>>> Now I understand what did you mean by "for each consumer". So if we move
>>> this logic
>>> into install/remove_breakpoint as I tried to suggest, we will also need
>>> another error
>>>
Hi Oleg,
On 07/10/2018 08:55 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Hi Ravi,
>
> On 07/04, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
>>
>>> Now I understand what did you mean by "for each consumer". So if we move
>>> this logic
>>> into install/remove_breakpoint as I tried to suggest, we will also need
>>> another error
>>>
On 07/03, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> In short. There is a 1:1 relationship between uprobe_write_opcode(is_register
> => 1)
> and install_breakpoint(), and between uprobe_write_opcode(is_register => 0)
> and
> remove_breakpoint(). Whatever uprobe_write_opcode() can do if is_register ==
> 1 can be
On 07/03, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> In short. There is a 1:1 relationship between uprobe_write_opcode(is_register
> => 1)
> and install_breakpoint(), and between uprobe_write_opcode(is_register => 0)
> and
> remove_breakpoint(). Whatever uprobe_write_opcode() can do if is_register ==
> 1 can be
6 matches
Mail list logo
