lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Nov]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v7 3.2-rc2 5/30] uprobes: copy of the original instruction.
From
Date
On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 14:49 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 19:40 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-11-18 at 16:37 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > > + /* TODO : Analysis and verification of instruction */
> >
> > As in refuse to set a breakpoint on an instruction we can't deal with?
> >
> > Do we care? The worst case we'll crash the program, but if we're allowed
> > setting uprobes we already have enough privileges to do that anyway,
> > right?
>
> Well, I wouldn't be happy if I was running a server, and needed to
> analyze something it was doing, and because I screwed up the location of
> my probe, I crash the server, made lots of people unhappy and lose my
> job over it.
>
> I think we do care, but it can be a TODO item.

But but but, why not let userspace sort it? And if you're going to
provide the kernel with inode:offset data yourself, you're already well
aware of wtf you're doing.




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-11-23 21:55    [W:0.080 / U:0.288 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site