Re: [PATCH v5 7/14] x86 support for Uprobes

[Steven Rostedt]

On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 17:45 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:

> local_irq_enable() translates to raw_local_irq_enable().
> However raw_local_irq_enable on x86 seems to depend on CONFIG_PARAVIRT.
> On a machine, where CONFIG_PARAVIRT was defined, local_irq_enable
> translates to something other than native_irq_enable.
> It translates to PVOP_VCALLEE0(pv_irq_ops.irq_enable);
> 
> Is it okay to use local_irq_enable() and then make CONFIG_UPROBES depend
> on !CONFIG_PARAVIRT?
> 

It should still work under paravirt. If it does not, we need to figurure
out why.

On boot up, when CONFIG_PARAVIRT is set but the kernel is running on
bare metal, a lot of the calls to things like "pv_irq_ops.irq_enabled"
are converted to the native caller anyway. Perhaps the conversion messed
up?

-- Steve


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/