From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753798Ab2ALOue (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jan 2012 09:50:34 -0500 Received: from mail7.hitachi.co.jp ([133.145.228.42]:32883 "EHLO mail7.hitachi.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753168Ab2ALOud (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jan 2012 09:50:33 -0500 X-AuditID: b753bd60-98392ba000007b1b-5e-4f0ef33631eb X-AuditID: b753bd60-98392ba000007b1b-5e-4f0ef33631eb Message-ID: <4F0EF32F.6060001@hitachi.com> Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 23:50:23 +0900 From: Masami Hiramatsu Organization: Hitachi, Ltd., Japan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Srikar Dronamraju Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Linus Torvalds , Oleg Nesterov , Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , LKML , Linux-mm , Andi Kleen , Christoph Hellwig , Steven Rostedt , Roland McGrath , Thomas Gleixner , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Anton Arapov , Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli , Jim Keniston , Stephen Rothwell , yrl.pp-manager.tt@hitachi.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 3.2.0-rc5 9/9] perf: perf interface for uprobes References: <20111216122756.2085.95791.sendpatchset@srdronam.in.ibm.com> <20111216122951.2085.95511.sendpatchset@srdronam.in.ibm.com> <4F06D22D.9060906@hitachi.com> <20120109112427.GB10189@linux.vnet.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20120109112427.GB10189@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Srikar, (2012/01/09 20:24), Srikar Dronamraju wrote: >> >>> + >>> +static int convert_to_perf_probe_point(struct probe_trace_point *tp, >>> + struct perf_probe_point *pp) >>> +{ >>> + pp->function = strdup(tp->symbol); >>> + if (pp->function == NULL) >>> + return -ENOMEM; >>> + pp->offset = tp->offset; >>> + pp->retprobe = tp->retprobe; >>> + >>> + return 0; >>> +} >> >> This function could be used in kprobe_convert_to_perf_probe() too. >> In that case, it will be separated as a cleanup from this. > > Do you really want this in a separate patch, since it doesnt make too > much sense without the uprobes code. If so, breaking this big patch into small pieces helps (at least) me to review/maintain the change :) Thank you, -- Masami HIRAMATSU Software Platform Research Dept. Linux Technology Center Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com