Re: [PATCHSET 00/13] tracing/uprobes: Add support for more fetch methods (v6)

[Namhyung Kim]

Hi Oleg and Masami,

On Sat, 9 Nov 2013 16:23:13 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 11/09, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>>
>> In that case, I suggest you to use "@+addr" for the relative address,
>> since that is an offset, isn't that? :)
>
> Agreed, @+addr looks better!

Looks good to me too.

>
>> BTW, it seems that @addr syntax is hard to use for uprobes, because
>> current uprobes is based on a binary, not a process, we cannot specify
>> which process is probed when we define it.
>
> Yes, exactly. That is why we suggest that user-space should pass the
> ip-relative address (actually offset). This should hopefully solve all
> problems with relocations.

Let me clarify what I understand.

For @addr syntax: kernel does no translation and uses given address

For @+addr syntax: user-space uses relative symbol address from a loaded
                   base address and kernel calculates the base address
                   using "current->utask->vaddr - tu->offset".

Is that right?

Thanks,
Namhyung
--
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/