From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dave.long@linaro.org (David Long) Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 21:07:24 -0500 Subject: [PATCH v5 07/16] ARM: Remove use of struct kprobe from generic probes code In-Reply-To: <1391439425.3509.16.camel@linaro1.home> References: <1390507559-4697-1-git-send-email-dave.long@linaro.org> <1390507559-4697-8-git-send-email-dave.long@linaro.org> <1391439425.3509.16.camel@linaro1.home> Message-ID: <52F04B5C.5060301@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 02/03/14 09:57, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote: > On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 15:05 -0500, David Long wrote: >> From: "David A. Long" >> >> 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 >> --- > > 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? > Yes, that got lost during editing. The change has been made. -dl