From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24FA02C00EE for ; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 03:02:32 +1100 (EST) Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 17:00:02 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/uprobes: teach uprobes to ignore gdb breakpoints Message-ID: <20130321160002.GB20865@redhat.com> References: <20130320104033.GA19844@in.ibm.com> <20130320122639.GA29541@redhat.com> <20130320124301.GA30887@redhat.com> <20130320154245.GB8246@in.ibm.com> <20130320160728.GB20352@redhat.com> <20130321071707.GB5271@in.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20130321071707.GB5271@in.ibm.com> Cc: ppcdev , Srikar Dronamraju , stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 03/21, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote: ? > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 05:07:28PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 03/20, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 01:43:01PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > On 03/20, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > > > > > > IOW, if I wasn't clear... Lets forget about gdb/etc for the moment. > > > > Suppose we apply the patch below. Will uprobes on powerpc work? > > > > > > > > If yes, then your patch should be fine. If not, we probably need more > > > > changes. > > > > > > Yes, it will work fine. > > > > Even if this new insn is conditional? > > Yes. But this can't be true. If it is conditional, it won't always generate a trap, this means uprobe won't actually work. Oleg.