From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756855Ab0AOJ05 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jan 2010 04:26:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755188Ab0AOJ04 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jan 2010 04:26:56 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60734 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751920Ab0AOJ0z (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jan 2010 04:26:55 -0500 To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Jim Keniston , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Frederic Weisbecker , LKML , Mark Wielaard , utrace-devel Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 4/7] Uprobes Implementation References: <20100111122521.22050.3654.sendpatchset@srikar.in.ibm.com> <20100111122553.22050.46895.sendpatchset@srikar.in.ibm.com> <1263467394.4244.291.camel@laptop> <1263509380.4875.35.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1263546632.4244.352.camel@laptop> From: fche@redhat.com (Frank Ch. Eigler) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 04:26:33 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1263546632.4244.352.camel@laptop> (Peter Zijlstra's message of "Fri, 15 Jan 2010 10:10:32 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Peter Zijlstra writes: > [...] > Right, so all that need be done is add the multiple probe stuff to UBP > and its a sane interface to use on its own, at which point I'd be > inclined to call that uprobes (UBP really is an crap name). At one point ubp+uprobes were one piece. They were separated on the suspicion that lkml would like them that way. > Then we can ditch the whole utrace muck as I see no reason to want to > use that, whereas the ubp (given a sane name) looks interesting. Assuming you meant what you write, perhaps you misunderstand the layering relationship of these pieces. utrace underlies uprobes and other process manipulation functionality, present and future. - FChE