On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 17:18:06 +0200
pet...@infradead.org wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 12:10:10AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 14:52:36 +0200
> > pet...@infradead.org wrote:
>
> > > > synchronize_rcu();
> > >
> > > This one might help, this means we can do
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 12:10:10AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 14:52:36 +0200
> pet...@infradead.org wrote:
> > > synchronize_rcu();
> >
> > This one might help, this means we can do rcu_read_lock() around
> > get_kretprobe() and it's usage. Can we call rp->handler()
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 14:52:36 +0200
pet...@infradead.org wrote:
>
> If you do this, can you merge this into the previos patch and then
> delete the sched try_to_invoke..() patch?
Yes, this is just for making code review easy. :)
>
> Few comments below.
>
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 09:30:17PM
If you do this, can you merge this into the previos patch and then
delete the sched try_to_invoke..() patch?
Few comments below.
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 09:30:17PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> +static nokprobe_inline struct kretprobe *get_kretprobe(struct
> kretprobe_instance *ri)
> +{
Remove task scan for updating kretprobe_instance->rp when unregistering
kretprobe. Instead, this introduces the kretprobe_holder which is a
kretprobe pointer holder with refcount. When we unregister the kretprobe,
we update the pointer value in the holder which means this kretprobe
is already
5 matches
Mail list logo
