Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/7] UBP, XOL and Uprobes [ Summary of Commentsand actions to be taken ]

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 12:54 +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 12:32:32PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > Here is a summary of the Comments and actions that need to be taken for
> > the current uprobes patchset. Please let me know if I missed or
> > misunderstood any of your comments.  
> > 
> > 1. Uprobes depends on trap signal.
> > 	Uprobes depends on trap signal rather than hooking to the global
> > die notifier. It was suggested that we hook to the global die notifier.
> > 
> > 	In the next version of patches, Uprobes will use the global die
> > 	notifier and look at the per-task count of the probes in use to
> > 	see if it has to be consumed.
> > 
> > 	However this would reduce the ability of uprobe handlers to
> > 	sleep. Since we are dealing with userspace, sleeping in handlers
> > 	would have been a good feature. We are looking at ways to get
> > 	around this limitation.
> 
> We could set a TIF_ flag in the notifier to indicate a breakpoint hit
> and process it in task context before the task heads into userspace.

Make that optional, not everybody might want that. Either provide a
simple trampoline or use a flag to indicate the callback be called from
process context on registration.

--
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/