Re: [RFC 3/8] Kernel/uprobe: Define arch_uprobe_exception_notify as __weak

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 12/31, Pratyush Anand wrote:
>
> Both ARM and ARM64 handle uprobe exceptions through their own hooks.So
> nothing to be done in arch_uprobe_exception_notify except to return
> NOTIFY_DONE. Implement this as weak default function and remove
> definition from arm arch code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pratyush Anand <panand@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/arm/kernel/uprobes.c |  6 ------
>  kernel/events/uprobes.c   | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/uprobes.c b/arch/arm/kernel/uprobes.c
> index 56adf9c1fde0..0f3663ca82fc 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/uprobes.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/uprobes.c
> @@ -178,12 +178,6 @@ void arch_uprobe_abort_xol(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
>  	instruction_pointer_set(regs, utask->vaddr);
>  }
>
> -int arch_uprobe_exception_notify(struct notifier_block *self,
> -				 unsigned long val, void *data)
> -{
> -	return NOTIFY_DONE;
> -}

I agree, this is ugly. But I disagree with this change.

I think we should simply kill uprobe_exception_nb and unexport
arch_uprobe_exception_notify on x86/powerpc, and in fact I was going to do
this a long ago.

I'll send the patch later. Until then please add the dummy arch_uprobe_exception_notify()
like arch/arm does, to make the generic code happy.

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/