Re: [PATCH 3/4] uprobes/tracing: Kill the pointless local_save_flags/preempt_countcalls
From: Masami Hiramatsu
Date: Mon Apr 08 2013 - 05:29:36 EST
(2013/04/06 0:01), Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 04/05, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>> Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Masami, perhaps you can also answer the question I asked in 0/4
> marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=136458107403835 ?
> Off-topic question... Why uprobe_perf_func() passes "addr = ip" to
> perf_trace_buf_submit() ? This just sets perf_sample_data->addr for
> PERF_SAMPLE_ADDR, do we really need this? and we already have
> perf_sample_data->ip initialized by perf.
> kprobe_perf_func() and kretprobe_perf_func() do the same.
Good catch! I guess that I might misunderstood that it was used
for sampling execution address. It should be replaced with (u64)0,
as perf_trace_##call() does.
> Once again, I am just curious and this is completely offtopic.
Thank you :)
IT Management Research Dept. Linux Technology Center
Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory
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/