Re: [PATCH V3 03/13] kprobes: Add symbols for kprobe insn pages

[Jiri Olsa]

On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 06:49:13PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Feb 2020 13:49:47 +0900
> Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:20:04 +0100
> > Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > > BTW, it seems to pretend to be a module, but is there no concern of
> > > > confusing users? Shouldn't it be [*kprobes] so that it is non-exist
> > > > module name?  
> > > 
> > > note we already have bpf symbols as [bpf] module  
> > 
> > Yeah, and this series adds [kprobe(s)] and [ftrace] too.
> > I simply concern that the those module names implicitly become
> > special word (rule) and embedded in the code. If such module names
> > are not exposed to users, it is OK (but I hope to have some comments).
> > However, it is under /proc, which means users can notice it.
> 
> I share Masami's concerns. It would be good to have something
> differentiate local functions that are not modules. That's one way I
> look to see if something is a module or built in, is to see if kallsyms
> has it as a [].
> 
> Perhaps prepend with: '&' ?

that would break some of the perf code.. IMO Arnaldo's explanation
makes sense and we could keep it as it is

jirka