Re: [PATCH 6/7] uprobes: Do not allocate current->utask unnecessary

2013-01-08 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 01/08, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > > * Oleg Nesterov [2012-12-31 18:52:29]: > > > static void handle_swbp(struct pt_regs *regs) > > { > > - struct uprobe_task *utask; > > struct uprobe *uprobe; > > unsigned long bp_vaddr; > > int uninitialized_var(is_swbp); > > @@ -1512,19 +1515,

Re: [PATCH 6/7] uprobes: Do not allocate current->utask unnecessary

2013-01-08 Thread Srikar Dronamraju
* Oleg Nesterov [2012-12-31 18:52:29]: > handle_swbp() does get_utask() before can_skip_sstep() for no reason, > we do not need ->utask if can_skip_sstep() succeeds. > > Move get_utask() to pre_ssout() who actually starts to use it. Move > the initialization of utask->active_uprobe/state as well

[PATCH 6/7] uprobes: Do not allocate current->utask unnecessary

2012-12-31 Thread Oleg Nesterov
handle_swbp() does get_utask() before can_skip_sstep() for no reason, we do not need ->utask if can_skip_sstep() succeeds. Move get_utask() to pre_ssout() who actually starts to use it. Move the initialization of utask->active_uprobe/state as well. This way the whole initialization is consolidated