* Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 01/25, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Srikar Dronamraju <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > The other alternative is to extend the current abi and pass
> > > the prefilter option. Should we extend the abi for userspace
> > > tracing is obviously debatable.
> >
> > That's the obvious path to go - why add something to the kernel
> > if user-space cannot make use of it?
>
> This is what I am going to (try to) do, but I am not sure if this makes
> sense...
>
> For the start, can't we teach 'uprobe_events' file to accept, say,
>
> 'p file:0x1234 pid=1 other-opts'
>
> for the start? This looks simple enough, and I after looked
> into tools/perf it seems that perf can be changed too.
>
> What do you think?
Sounds sensible and functional to me.
> Then we can extend 'pid=' option to accept the list of pids,
> perhaps.
>
> In the long term we probably need uprobes/pid_filter or
> something like this, it should allow to add/del pid
> dynamically. I really do not know.
For now removing+adding a new one should be enough to 'change' a
uprobe, right?
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
