Re: Question about config UPROBES and UPROBE_EVENTS

[Tiezhu Yang]

On 9/30/24 23:43, Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 11:32:31 -0400
> Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 00:28:13 +0900
> > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 10:06:30 -0400
> > > Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 09:33:42 +0800
> > > > Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >    
> > > > > > the CONFIG_UPROBES is disabled by default and make CONFIG_UPROBE_EVENTS
> > > > > > depending on it, the uprobe_events menu is hidden. I don't like this.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is somehow like the current status of CONFIG_KPROBES and
> > > > > CONFIG_KPROBE_EVENTS.
> > > >
> > > > The question is, can uprobes be used without uprobe_events? With the
> > > > current BPF work that I haven't been following, it may be possible now.
> > >
> > > uprobe_register/unregister APIs are exposed to the kernel modules,
> > > since systemtap had been introduced this feature.
> >
> > OK, but since they have always been visible, I would just make
> > CONFIG_UPROBES a normal option and CONFIG_UPROBE_EVENTS select it if it
> > gets selected, and not depend on it.
>
> Agreed.

Thanks very much for your discussions. I agree with you.

Then, CONFIG_KPROBE_EVENTS should depend on or select CONFIG_KPROBES?
In the current code, CONFIG_KPROBE_EVENTS depend on CONFIG_KPROBES,
the CONFIG_KPROBE_EVENTS menu is hidden if CONFIG_KPROBES is not set.

Thanks,
Tiezhu