Re: [PATCH 5/6] uprobes: don't use loff_t for the valid virtualaddress

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 06/14, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 08:51:06PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > loff_t looks confusing when it is used for the virtual address.
> > Change map_info and install_breakpoint/remove_breakpoint paths
> > to use "unsigned long".
> >
> > The patch doesn't change vma_address(), it can't return "long"
> > because it is used to verify the mapping. But probably this
> > needs some cleanups too.
>
> Oleg,
>
> As you mentioned in another email, this conflicts with my [1/2]
> preparatory patch for the powerpc port.

Yes, sorry. I didn't notice it was already applied.

As I said, I do not really agree with this change,
arch_uprobe_analyze_insn() shouldn't use addr/vaddr.

However this is minor, we can change this later. And this code needs
more changes anyway.

I'll rebase this series on top of your "1/2" and resend.


> Do you think it just makes sense
> to make the arch_uprobe_analyze_insn() prototype change to take vaddr as
> part of this set itself?

Yes, Anton already did the necessary fixup (thanks Anton ;)

Oleg.

--
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/