Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 20 Jun 2007 19:07:51 -0400 | From | Dave Jones <> | Subject | Re: [1/2] 2.6.22-rc5: known regressions with patches |
| |
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 03:38:06PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> And yes, that patch already got merged. However, the patch to *allow* > Kprobes with DEBUG_RODATA is not, and will not be. It's not a regression, > and quite frankly, I don't think I would even want that patch. > > Kprobes fundamntally disagrees with DEBUG_RODATA, there's no point in > "working around it". Better just admit it.
Surely the fundamental disagreement is only due to DEBUG_RODATA covering write-protection of both .text, and .rodata ? I can see value in having a kernel that supports kprobes, whilst at the same point, raising red flags if something writes into a const string. With my distro kernel maintainer hat on, I always hate these 'pick one' decisions, because I always get convincing arguments from proponents of both sides.
Was it always this way? I thought DEBUG_RODATA initially just covered, well.. rodata. And kprobes only wants to change .text doesn't it ?
Dave
-- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |