From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e2.ny.us.ibm.com (e2.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.142]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e2.ny.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F00B0B6EEB for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 19:37:54 +1000 (EST) Received: from /spool/local by e2.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 05:37:52 -0400 Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by d01dlp01.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0EE338C8026 for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 05:37:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (d01av03.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.217]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id q569bnFB147636 for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 05:37:49 -0400 Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id q569blpD004891 for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 06:37:49 -0300 Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 15:07:44 +0530 From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli To: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] uprobes: Pass probed vaddr to arch_uprobe_analyze_insn() Message-ID: <20120606093744.GB29580@in.ibm.com> References: <20120606091950.GB6745@in.ibm.com> <1338974632.2749.87.camel@twins> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1338974632.2749.87.camel@twins> Cc: Srikar Dronamraju , lkml , oleg@redhat.com, Paul Mackerras , Anton Blanchard , Ingo Molnar , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Reply-To: ananth@in.ibm.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:23:52AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 14:49 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote: > > +int arch_uprobe_analyze_insn(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct mm_struct *mm, loff_t vaddr) > > Don't we traditionally use unsigned long to pass vaddrs? Right. But the vaddr we pass here is vma_info->vaddr which is loff_t. I guess I should've made that clear in the patch description. Ananth