Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/7] User Space Breakpoint Assistance Layer (UBP)

[Avi Kivity]

On 01/17/2010 04:52 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-01-17 at 16:39 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
>    
> > On 01/15/2010 11:50 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >      
> > > As previously stated, I think poking at a process's address space is an
> > > utter no-go.
> > >
> > >        
> > Why not reserve an address space range for this, somewhere near the top
> > of memory?  It doesn't have to be populated if it isn't used.
> >      
> Because I think poking at a process's address space like that is gross.
>    

If it's reserved, it's no longer the process' address space.

> Also, if its fixed size you're imposing artificial limits on the number
> of possible probes.
>    

Obviously we'll need a limit, a uprobe will also take kernel memory, we 
can't allow people to exhaust it.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/