Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 14 Jun 2012 12:58:07 +0200 | From | Anton Arapov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 5/6] uprobes: don't use loff_t for the valid virtual address |
| |
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 02:13:00PM +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:38:26AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 08:51:06PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > loff_t looks confusing when it is used for the virtual address. > > > > Change map_info and install_breakpoint/remove_breakpoint paths > > > > to use "unsigned long". > > > > > > > > The patch doesn't change vma_address(), it can't return "long" > > > > because it is used to verify the mapping. But probably this > > > > needs some cleanups too. > > > > > > Oleg, > > > > > > As you mentioned in another email, this conflicts with my > > > [1/2] preparatory patch for the powerpc port. [...] > > > > Note, I already merged your preparatory patch into tip:perf/core > > a couple of days ago: > > > > 7eb9ba5ed312 uprobes: Pass probed vaddr to arch_uprobe_analyze_insn() > > > > So as long as Oleg is working on top of -tip there should be no > > conflict. > > Ah.. thanks Ingo. I missed that tip commit email.
Seems Oleg didn't use -tip. There are no conflicts though, just a small neat there ... Fixed in follow up mail.
Anton
| |