From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752718AbbADNvJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jan 2015 08:51:09 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33230 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752586AbbADNvG (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jan 2015 08:51:06 -0500 Message-ID: <54A94513.20808@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2015 19:20:11 +0530 From: Pratyush Anand User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Oleg Nesterov CC: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, tixy@linaro.org, ananth@in.ibm.com, sandeepa.prabhu@linaro.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com, masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com, wcohen@redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC 3/8] Kernel/uprobe: Define arch_uprobe_exception_notify as __weak References: <20150102174314.GA6761@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20150102174314.GA6761@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 02 January 2015 11:13 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 12/31, Pratyush Anand wrote: >> >> Both ARM and ARM64 handle uprobe exceptions through their own hooks.So >> nothing to be done in arch_uprobe_exception_notify except to return >> NOTIFY_DONE. Implement this as weak default function and remove >> definition from arm arch code. >> >> Signed-off-by: Pratyush Anand >> --- >> arch/arm/kernel/uprobes.c | 6 ------ >> kernel/events/uprobes.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/uprobes.c b/arch/arm/kernel/uprobes.c >> index 56adf9c1fde0..0f3663ca82fc 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/uprobes.c >> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/uprobes.c >> @@ -178,12 +178,6 @@ void arch_uprobe_abort_xol(struct arch_uprobe *auprobe, struct pt_regs *regs) >> instruction_pointer_set(regs, utask->vaddr); >> } >> >> -int arch_uprobe_exception_notify(struct notifier_block *self, >> - unsigned long val, void *data) >> -{ >> - return NOTIFY_DONE; >> -} > > I agree, this is ugly. But I disagree with this change. > > I think we should simply kill uprobe_exception_nb and unexport > arch_uprobe_exception_notify on x86/powerpc, and in fact I was going to do > this a long ago. > > I'll send the patch later. Until then please add the dummy arch_uprobe_exception_notify() > like arch/arm does, to make the generic code happy. OK. ~Pratyush > > Oleg. >