Re: [for-next][PATCH 03/13] fprobe: Add ftrace based probe APIs

[Steven Rostedt]

On Thu, 17 Mar 2022 15:03:33 -0700
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Do I understand correctly that this patch set was applied in your
> tree? I was under the impression that we agreed to route this through
> the bpf-next tree earlier (see [0]), but I might have misunderstood
> something, sorry.
> 
> Either way, the reason it matters is because Jiri's multi-attach
> kprobe patch set ([1]) is depending on Masami's patches and having
> fprobe patches in bpf-next tree would simplify logistics
> significantly.

I knew Jiri's patches were to go through the bpf tree, but I missed that
those were dependent on this and you wanted these to go through as well.

I had just finished my automated tests that ran these patches. I haven't
pushed them to my next branch yet so I can hold them off. I don't have
anything dependent on them.

Would you be able to take these for-next patches directly (as they all have
been tested) and you can switch my signed-off-by to Reviewed-by.

The first of the series is unrelated and will go through my tree. That's
the user_events patch.

-- Steve


> 
> So I wonder if it's still possible to route it through bpf-next?
> 
> If not, we'd need a way to get these changes into the bpf-next tree
> somehow. Having it in a separate branch that we can merge would be a
> way to go about this, I presume? But it's certainly a more complicated
> way, so it would be preferable to back it out and land through
> bpf-next.