lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 02/13] uprobes: allow ignoring of probe hits
Sorry for top-posting/formatting,

Do you mean arch_uprobe_skip_sstep() ?

Yes, this __weak is wrong, already fixed in my tree. See
http://marc.info/?l=linux-mips&m=138132052022388&w=2

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Long" <dave.long@linaro.org>
To: "Oleg Nesterov" <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, "Rabin Vincent" <rabin@rab.in>, "Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" <tixy@linaro.org>, "Srikar Dronamraju" <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Tuesday, 22 October, 2013 5:45:47 AM
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/13] uprobes: allow ignoring of probe hits

On 10/19/13 13:02, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 10/15, David Long wrote:
>>
>> @@ -1732,9 +1732,6 @@ static void handle_swbp(struct pt_regs *regs)
>> return;
>> }
>>
>> - /* change it in advance for ->handler() and restart */
>> - instruction_pointer_set(regs, bp_vaddr);
>> -
>
> Well, this looks obviously wrong. This SET_IP() has the comment ;)
>
> Note also that with this breaks __skip_sstep() on x86.
>
> Oleg.
>

Yes, and there's a missing weak stub function in there too. It was a
surprise to me that declaring an external as weak means that it quietly
ignores the fact there is no definition for it at link time, and makes
it zero. I think there may be some similar land mines elsewhere in the
kernel, unrelated to these changes or uprobes in general.

I have an updated version to go out with the v3 patches. It is working
with v3.12-rc6 on x86 and ARM, to the extent I'm able to test it.

-dl


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-10-22 13:41    [W:0.296 / U:0.300 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site