On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 14:44:41 +0100
Andreas Ziegler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 1/17/19 10:47 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 09:08:41 +0100
> > Andreas Ziegler wrote:
> >
> >> On 17.01.19 09:00, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:13:09 +0900
> >>> Masami Hiramatsu
On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 02:44:41PM +0100, Andreas Ziegler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 1/17/19 10:47 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 09:08:41 +0100
> > Andreas Ziegler wrote:
> >
> > > On 17.01.19 09:00, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:13:09 +0900
> > > > Masami
Hi,
On 1/17/19 10:47 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 09:08:41 +0100
Andreas Ziegler wrote:
On 17.01.19 09:00, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:13:09 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:16:07 +0100
Andreas Ziegler wrote:
I went into this a
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 09:08:41 +0100
Andreas Ziegler wrote:
> On 17.01.19 09:00, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:13:09 +0900
> > Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:16:07 +0100
> >> Andreas Ziegler wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I went into this a bit deeper today
On 17.01.19 09:00, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:13:09 +0900
> Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:16:07 +0100
>> Andreas Ziegler wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I went into this a bit deeper today, and right now it is simply failing
>>> to parse the code because there is n
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 15:13:09 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:16:07 +0100
> Andreas Ziegler wrote:
>
> >
> > I went into this a bit deeper today, and right now it is simply failing
> > to parse the code because there is no FETCH_OP_COMM case in
> > process_fetch_insn()
On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:16:07 +0100
Andreas Ziegler wrote:
>
> I went into this a bit deeper today, and right now it is simply failing
> to parse the code because there is no FETCH_OP_COMM case in
> process_fetch_insn() for uprobes so that will return -EILSEQ, leading to
> a make_data_loc(0, .
Hi,
thanks for your reply!
On 1/16/19 11:00 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 14:36:48 +0100
Andreas Ziegler wrote:
Hi again,
On 1/14/19 1:38 PM, Andreas Ziegler wrote:
Hi,
I've been playing around with uprobes today and found the following weird
behaviour/output when using
On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 14:36:48 +0100
Andreas Ziegler wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> On 1/14/19 1:38 PM, Andreas Ziegler wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've been playing around with uprobes today and found the following weird
> > behaviour/output when using more than one string argument (or using the
> > $comm
Hi again,
On 1/14/19 1:38 PM, Andreas Ziegler wrote:
Hi,
I've been playing around with uprobes today and found the following weird
behaviour/output when using more than one string argument (or using the $comm
argument). This was run on a v4.20 mainline build on Ubuntu 18.04.
root@ubuntu1810:
Hi,
I've been playing around with uprobes today and found the following weird
behaviour/output when using more than one string argument (or using the $comm
argument). This was run on a v4.20 mainline build on Ubuntu 18.04.
root@ubuntu1810:~# uname -a
Linux ubuntu1810 4.20.0-042000-generic #20
11 matches
Mail list logo