Re: [PATCH v3 00/15] uprobes: Add uprobes support for ARM

[David Long]

Masami/Tixy,

As I just noted in a previous email the kprobes.h thing has come back to 
haunt me.  Something more is needed in my last patchset.  Tixy's 
suggestion regarding the arch_specific_insn structure:

> However, I also wonder if we should instead leave arch_specific_insn as
> a kprobes specific structure and on ARM define it in terms of a new more
> generic 'struct probe_insn'? The drawback with that is that we'd
> probably end up with a struct just containing a single member which
> seems a bit redundant:
>
> struct arch_specific_insn {
> 	struct probe_insn pinsn;
> };
>
> Thought's anyone?

...got me thinking.  When I do as he suggests and create a new 
arch-specific structure for sharing between kprobes and uprobes then it 
turns out simply #define'ing the arch_specific_insn structure tag to the 
new structure tag in arch/arm/include/kprobes.h makes everything happy. 
 When KPROBES is not configured that include file is (still) not 
included and the generic kprobes.h include file still continues to make 
a dummy structure for it.  My question is:  Is it too hacky to use a 
#define for a structure tag this way?

-dl

--
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/