From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932293Ab0FQPje (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:39:34 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:58504 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752471Ab0FQPjd (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:39:33 -0400 Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:39:24 -0400 From: Jason Baron To: Ian Munsie Cc: fweisbec , linux-kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] tracing: add compat syscall support v3 Message-ID: <20100617153924.GD3237@redhat.com> References: <1274433809-sup-5031@au1.ibm.com> <20100521132405.GA2109@redhat.com> <1276759528-sup-4850@au1.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1276759528-sup-4850@au1.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 05:39:07PM +1000, Ian Munsie wrote: > Excerpts from Jason Baron's message of Fri May 21 23:24:07 +1000 2010: > > On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 07:40:21PM +1000, Ian Munsie wrote: > > > Hi Jason, > > > > > > I'm currently in the process of implementing syscall tracepoints for > > > PowerPC, and a considerable amount of my work is going to end up > > > requiring these patches of yours. I've reviewed and tested your patches > > > (and spent a good chunk of time rebasing them on top of > > > tip/tracing/core) and they all seem pretty good. > > > > > > I *particularly* like the way in which they prevent ftrace syscalls from > > > reporting that sys_swapoff was constantly firing on x86_64 kernels with > > > a 32bit userspace ;) > > > > > > Anyway, I'm just wondering if you have an ETA for the v4 patchset to > > > address the remaining issues that Frederic raised so that they can be > > > merged. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > -Ian > > > > > > > hi Ian, > > > > I think the main issue left was that I am using the same meta data for > > both the 32-bit and 64-bit table entries, when they reference the same > > syscall. for example, for x86 both the compat and underlying 64-bit > > kernel reference 'sys_rename'. Thus, i am pointing both perf events at > > the same meta data. Frederic was saying they need to be separate. I'm > > not sure i completely understand why, since the 32-bit are just sign > > extended to 64-bit in this case. Frederic, perhaps, you can explain this > > a bit more for me? > > > > thanks, > > > > -Jason > > Hi Jason, > > I'm currently cleaning up my patch series for ftrace syscalls on PowerPC > and want to release it soon. > > It's probably easiest for me if I release your compat syscall support v3 > patches as part of the series. You'd still be marked as the author of > those commits - the only changes I have made to them was rebasing them > against the current tip tree and resolving the conflicts that I came > across. > > Is that OK with you? Otherwise I can wait until you put out the v4 > patches then rebase mine on top of those. > Hi Ian if its easier for you, that's fine, feel free to include my patches with your patchset. thanks, -Jason