> Yes, and it is always equal to regs->ip when pre_ssout() is called,
>
> > and do the necessary fixups after single stepping out of line.
>
> Exactly. So it is write-only (and meaningless) to the generic uprobe
> code. We can (and perhaps should) move it into autask->saved_vaddr,
> arch_uprobe_p
On 11/11, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 11/11, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> >
> > Nit:
> > Can we rename dup_addr to mean that it refers to the xol; something like
> > dup_xol_addr or even xol_addr. So that its more clear what address it
> > refers to.
>
> OK. How about dup_xol_work/dup_xol_vaddr ?
I
On 11/11, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
>
> * Oleg Nesterov [2013-11-08 20:00:03]:
>
> > uprobe_task->vaddr is a bit strange. First of all it is not really
> > needed, we can move it into arch_uprobe_task. The generic code uses
> > it only to pass the additional argument to arch_uprobe_pre_xol(),
> > a
* Oleg Nesterov [2013-11-08 20:00:03]:
> uprobe_task->vaddr is a bit strange. First of all it is not really
> needed, we can move it into arch_uprobe_task. The generic code uses
> it only to pass the additional argument to arch_uprobe_pre_xol(),
> and since it is always equal to instruction_point
(2013/11/09 4:00), Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> uprobe_task->vaddr is a bit strange. First of all it is not really
> needed, we can move it into arch_uprobe_task. The generic code uses
> it only to pass the additional argument to arch_uprobe_pre_xol(),
> and since it is always equal to instruction_pointe
(2013/11/11 2:28), Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 11/11, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>>
>> (2013/11/09 4:00), Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>>> uprobe_task->vaddr is a bit strange. First of all it is not really
>>> needed, we can move it into arch_uprobe_task. The generic code uses
>>> it only to pass the additional
On 11/11, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> (2013/11/09 4:00), Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > uprobe_task->vaddr is a bit strange. First of all it is not really
> > needed, we can move it into arch_uprobe_task. The generic code uses
> > it only to pass the additional argument to arch_uprobe_pre_xol(),
> > and
(2013/11/09 4:00), Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> uprobe_task->vaddr is a bit strange. First of all it is not really
> needed, we can move it into arch_uprobe_task. The generic code uses
> it only to pass the additional argument to arch_uprobe_pre_xol(),
> and since it is always equal to instruction_pointe
uprobe_task->vaddr is a bit strange. First of all it is not really
needed, we can move it into arch_uprobe_task. The generic code uses
it only to pass the additional argument to arch_uprobe_pre_xol(),
and since it is always equal to instruction_pointer() this looks
even more strange.
And both utas
9 matches
Mail list logo
