From: David Long <dave.long@linaro.org>
To: "Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" <tixy@linaro.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com>
Cc: Taras Kondratiuk <taras.kondratiuk@linaro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Rabin Vincent <rabin@rab.in>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>,
Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com>,
davem@davemloft.net, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linaro Networking <linaro-networking@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/15] uprobes: Add uprobes support for ARM
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2013 15:17:46 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52A0DF6A.1010402@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <529F6B88.2050005@linaro.org>
Masami/Tixy,
As I just noted in a previous email the kprobes.h thing has come back to
haunt me. Something more is needed in my last patchset. Tixy's
suggestion regarding the arch_specific_insn structure:
> However, I also wonder if we should instead leave arch_specific_insn as
> a kprobes specific structure and on ARM define it in terms of a new more
> generic 'struct probe_insn'? The drawback with that is that we'd
> probably end up with a struct just containing a single member which
> seems a bit redundant:
>
> struct arch_specific_insn {
> struct probe_insn pinsn;
> };
>
> Thought's anyone?
...got me thinking. When I do as he suggests and create a new
arch-specific structure for sharing between kprobes and uprobes then it
turns out simply #define'ing the arch_specific_insn structure tag to the
new structure tag in arch/arm/include/kprobes.h makes everything happy.
When KPROBES is not configured that include file is (still) not
included and the generic kprobes.h include file still continues to make
a dummy structure for it. My question is: Is it too hacky to use a
#define for a structure tag this way?
-dl
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-05 20:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-27 2:53 [PATCH v3 00/15] uprobes: Add uprobes support for ARM David Long
2013-11-27 2:53 ` [PATCH v3 01/15] uprobes: allow ignoring of probe hits David Long
2013-11-28 18:41 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-11-27 2:53 ` [PATCH v3 02/15] ARM: move shared uprobe/kprobe definitions into new include file David Long
2013-11-27 2:53 ` [PATCH v3 03/15] ARM: Move generic arm instruction parsing code to new files for sharing between features David Long
2013-11-27 2:53 ` [PATCH v3 04/15] ARM: move generic thumb instruction parsing code to new files for use by other feature David Long
2013-11-27 2:53 ` [PATCH v3 05/15] ARM: use a function table for determining instruction interpreter actions David Long
2013-11-27 2:53 ` [PATCH v3 06/15] ARM: Disable jprobes test when built into thumb-mode kernel David Long
2013-11-27 10:16 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2013-11-27 2:53 ` [PATCH v3 07/15] ARM: Remove use of struct kprobe from generic probes code David Long
2013-11-27 2:53 ` [PATCH v3 08/15] ARM: Use new opcode type in ARM kprobes/uprobes code David Long
2013-11-27 2:53 ` [PATCH v3 09/15] ARM: Make the kprobes condition_check symbol names more generic David Long
2013-11-27 2:53 ` [PATCH v3 10/15] ARM: Change more ARM kprobes symbol names to something more David Long
2013-11-27 2:53 ` [PATCH v3 11/15] ARM: Rename the shared kprobes/uprobe return value enum David Long
2013-11-27 2:53 ` [PATCH v3 12/15] ARM: Change the remaining shared kprobes/uprobes symbols to something generic David Long
2013-11-27 2:53 ` [PATCH v3 13/15] ARM: Add an emulate flag to the kprobes/uprobes instruction decode functions David Long
2013-11-27 2:53 ` [PATCH v3 14/15] ARM: add uprobes support David Long
2013-12-04 17:23 ` Taras Kondratiuk
2013-11-27 2:53 ` [PATCH v3 15/15] ARM: Remove uprobes dependency on kprobes David Long
2013-12-04 17:51 ` [PATCH v3 00/15] uprobes: Add uprobes support for ARM Taras Kondratiuk
2013-12-05 19:48 ` David Long
2013-12-05 20:17 ` David Long [this message]
2013-12-20 16:10 ` Jon Medhurst (Tixy)
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=52A0DF6A.1010402@linaro.org \
--to=dave.long@linaro.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=acme@ghostprotocols.net \
--cc=ananth@in.ibm.com \
--cc=anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linaro-networking@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=rabin@rab.in \
--cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=taras.kondratiuk@linaro.org \
--cc=tixy@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox