Re: [PATCH v2 2.6.38-rc8-tip 5/20] 5: Uprobes: register/unregisterprobes.
From: Srikar Dronamraju
Date: Fri Mar 18 2011 - 15:00:12 EST
> > One of the install_uprobe could be failing because the process was
> > almost exiting, something like there was no mm->owner. Also lets
> > assume that the first few install_uprobes go thro and the last
> > install_uprobe fails. There could be breakpoint hits corresponding to
> > the already installed uprobes that get displayed. i.e all
> > breakpoint hits from the first install_uprobe to the time we detect a
> > failed a install_uprobe and revert all inserted breakpoints will be
> > shown as being captured.
> I think you can gracefully deal with the exit case and simply ignore
> that one. But you cannot let arbitrary installs fail and still report
> success, that gives very weak and nearly useless semantics.
If there are more than one instance of a process running and if one
instance of a process has a probe thro ptrace, install_uprobe would fail
for that process with -EEXIST since we dont want to probe locations that
have breakpoints already. Should we then act similar to the exit case,
do we also deal gracefully?
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/