On 08/30, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 07:37:48PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > Ananth, Sebastian, what if we start with the patch below? Then > > we can change arch/x86/kernel/uprobes.c to use the static > > uprobe_*_step() helpers from the 2nd patch. > > In principle I am fine with the change.
OK, good. > > If we agree this code should be per-arch, then why do need other > > hooks? This is just ugly, we already have arch_pre/post_xol. > > > > The only problem is the pending powerpc patches, the change below > > obviously breaks them. Were they already applied? If not, then > > probably Ananth can do v6 on top of the patch below ;) The necessary > > fixup is trivial. > > They are under review. OK, I understand that v6 can confuse the maintainer and complicate the merging process, please forget about v6. And yes, this is really minor problem, still it would be nice to avoid the unnecessary hooks/complications... So. We can add "weak arch_uprobe" hooks, fix x86, and after powerpc is merged change both powerpc and x86 in one patch (remove "weak" hooks and move enable/disable into arch_pre/post_xol). Or. We can apply the patch I sent right now, you can fix powerpc later, when it is merged. This all is for 3.7 anyway, and fixup is trivial. I agree either way. Which way do you prefer? Sebastian, thanks for v4 you sent. I am still not sure what should we do, but in any case I'll make the series which includes either 1-2 you sent previously or this new patch. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
