Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]> wrote on 09/05/2006 10:36:14:
> On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 12:35:08PM +0530, Prasanna S Panchamukhi wrote:
> > This patch provides two interfaces to insert and remove
> > user space probes. Each probe is uniquely identified by
> > inode and offset within that executable/library file.
> > Insertion of a probe involves getting the code page for
> > a given offset, mapping it into the memory and then inserting
> > the breakpoint at the given offset. Also the probe is added
> > to the uprobe_table hash list. A uprobe_module data structure
> > is allocated for every probed application/library image on disk.
> > Removal of a probe involves getting the code page for a given
> > offset, mapping that page into the memory and then replacing
> > the breakpoint instruction with a the original opcode.
> > This patch also provides aggregate probe handler feature,
> > where user can define multiple handlers per probe.
>
> This introduces interfaces that aren't used anywhere in the following
> patches. That is completely not acceptable. Please provide a proper
> userspace interface to this functionality, e.g. something based on the
> RPN code from Richard's dprobes.
>
Christoph, what are you asking for here? Surely not the RPN interpreter. I
thought everyone agreed that that was massive bloatware and that a binary
interface viz kprobes was a much better implementation.
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
