From: David Long <dave.long@linaro.org>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Rabin Vincent <rabin@rab.in>,
"Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" <tixy@linaro.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.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
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/14] uprobes: Add uprobes support for ARM
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 05:08:06 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53145486.8060009@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140303062324.GB20583@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 03/03/14 01:23, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> It should be me who should take the blame for this and not Oleg. This
> was discussed more than couple of times. I can recollect couple of
> discussions here.
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1017186
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1001605
I wasn't trying to assign blame to anyone, I was just soliciting an
opinion from the last uprobes maintainer I had a conversation with.
Thanks for the links.
> I know there were more discussions on this, but I cant dig them out at
> this time. Finally it was decided that
> 1. Users shouldnt have to select more than one config to select Uprobes.
> 2. There was no point in selecting Uprobes and not having Uprobe_event
> and vice versa.
>
> From the above, If a user chose UPROBE_EVENT, (which is the interface
> for uprobes), we would automatically assume that he wants to use Uprobes
> framework.
>
>> like "select" is used in part maybe just to avoid the recursive
>> dependency error that would be generated if "depends on" were used
>> in both places.
>
> We did "Select Uprobes" not because of avoiding recursive dependency but
> as told above, to select the framework, given that user has chosen the
> framework. We dont want to give a choice to user to choose uprobe_event
> but not choose Uprobes or vice versa.
I suppose that's more to the point.
>> However I don't think UPROBES should be dependent on
>> UPROBE_EVENT, only the other way around. As RK noted in previous
>
> Whats the point of having the framework(Uprobes) without an interface?
>
My comment was based only in the fact it built successfully that way on
both x86 and ARM. If there's no way to access the functionality without
both selected then I suppose it does make sense to not allow that
configuration. Maybe it's time to remove one of these config symbols.
I didn't see anything in the email history on this that says that would
be a bad idea. I'll try and come up with a patch.
-dl
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-03 10:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-10 7:38 [PATCH v6 00/14] uprobes: Add uprobes support for ARM David Long
2014-02-10 7:38 ` [PATCH v6 01/14] uprobes: allow ignoring of probe hits David Long
2014-02-10 7:38 ` [PATCH v6 02/14] ARM: move shared uprobe/kprobe definitions into new include file David Long
2014-02-10 7:38 ` [PATCH v6 03/14] ARM: Move generic arm instruction parsing code to new files for sharing between features David Long
2014-02-10 7:38 ` [PATCH v6 04/14] ARM: move generic thumb instruction parsing code to new files for use by other feature David Long
2014-02-10 7:38 ` [PATCH v6 05/14] ARM: use a function table for determining instruction interpreter action David Long
2014-02-10 7:38 ` [PATCH v6 06/14] ARM: Disable jprobes test when built into thumb-mode kernel David Long
2014-02-10 7:38 ` [PATCH v6 07/14] ARM: Remove use of struct kprobe from generic probes code David Long
2014-02-28 10:12 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-02-28 14:11 ` Jon Medhurst (Tixy)
2014-03-02 10:37 ` David Long
2014-03-02 12:11 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-02-10 7:38 ` [PATCH v6 08/14] ARM: Make the kprobes condition_check symbol names more generic David Long
2014-02-10 7:39 ` [PATCH v6 09/14] ARM: Change more ARM kprobes symbol names to something more David Long
2014-02-10 7:39 ` [PATCH v6 10/14] ARM: Rename the shared kprobes/uprobe return value enum David Long
2014-02-10 7:39 ` [PATCH v6 11/14] ARM: Change the remaining shared kprobes/uprobes symbols to something generic David Long
2014-02-10 7:39 ` [PATCH v6 12/14] ARM: Add an emulate flag to the kprobes/uprobes instruction decode functions David Long
2014-02-10 7:39 ` [PATCH v6 13/14] ARM: Make arch_specific_insn a define for new arch_probes_insn structure David Long
2014-02-10 7:39 ` [PATCH v6 14/14] ARM: add uprobes support David Long
2014-03-01 12:30 ` [PATCH v6 00/14] uprobes: Add uprobes support for ARM Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-03-02 12:02 ` David Long
2014-03-03 6:23 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2014-03-03 10:08 ` David Long [this message]
2014-03-03 10:39 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-03-03 20:50 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-03-04 0:53 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-03-04 17:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-03-06 8:10 ` David Long
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=53145486.8060009@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=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=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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).