From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: tixy@linaro.org (Jon Medhurst (Tixy))
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 14:57:05 +0000
Subject: [PATCH v5 07/16] ARM: Remove use of struct kprobe from generic
 probes code
In-Reply-To: <1390507559-4697-8-git-send-email-dave.long@linaro.org>
References: <1390507559-4697-1-git-send-email-dave.long@linaro.org>
 <1390507559-4697-8-git-send-email-dave.long@linaro.org>
Message-ID: <1391439425.3509.16.camel@linaro1.home>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 15:05 -0500, David Long wrote:
> From: "David A. Long" <dave.long@linaro.org>
> 
> Change the generic ARM probes code to pass in the opcode and architecture-specific
> structure separately instead of using struct kprobe, so we do not pollute
> code being used only for uprobes or other non-kprobes instruction
> interpretation.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David A. Long <dave.long@linaro.org>
> ---

One minor nit-pick...

[...]
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/kprobes-thumb.c b/arch/arm/kernel/kprobes-thumb.c
> index c7ee290..cea707a 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/kprobes-thumb.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/kprobes-thumb.c
[...]
> @@ -593,7 +590,7 @@ t16_emulate_pop_pc(struct kprobe *p, struct pt_regs *regs)
>  	bx_write_pc(pc, regs);
>  }
>  
> -static enum kprobe_insn __kprobes
> +enum kprobe_insn __kprobes
>  t16_decode_pop(kprobe_opcode_t insn, struct arch_specific_insn *asi,
>  		struct decode_header *d)
>  {

The above removal of 'static' appears to be an unneeded accidental
change?

-- 
Tixy