Re: [RFC] [PATCH 2.6.37-rc5-tip 13/20] 13: x86: x86 specific probehandling
From: Srikar Dronamraju
Date: Fri Jan 28 2011 - 00:04:14 EST
> > But I'll leave this to the x86 people who actually know the intricacies
> > of the single step cruft, I was just wondering why you weren't using (or
> > extending) the existing code.
> The hairy aspects of the step.c code are hairy (and not usable at interrupt
> level) because they do some instruction analysis. Since uprobes already
> does its own instruction analysis, reusing step.c's separate hacks makes
> less sense to me than integrating knowledge of the single-step vs
> pushf/popf issues into the uprobes instruction analysis.
> That said, there is further nontriviality just to do with the block-step
> support and with not clobbering user-visible usage of TF in eflags, which
> uprobes needs to handle as well. It makes sense to share that code rather
> than repeating it, even if that entails changes to the step.c code.
Uprobes doesn't request/handle block-step for now. So can we postpone
your suggested changes till uprobes needs to handle block-step?
Thanks and Regards
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/