Re: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers

Hi -

On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 08:11:40AM -0700, Martin J. Bligh wrote:

> [...]  Why don't we just copy the whole damned function somewhere
> else, and make an instrumented copy (as a kernel module)? Then
> reroute all the function calls through it [...]

Interesting idea.  Are you imagining this instrumented copy being
built at kernel compile time (something like building a "-g -O0"
parallel)?  Or compiled anew from original sources after deployment?
Or on-the-fly binary-level rewriting a la SPIN?

> OK, it's not completely trivial to do, but simpler than kprobes [...]

None of the three above are that easy.  Do you have an implementation
idea?


- FChE

Attachment: pgp94gUQPyo3i.pgp
Description: PGP signature

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers
    • From: Martin Bligh <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers
    • From: Mathieu Desnoyers <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers
    • From: "Martin J. Bligh" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 3/4] security: capabilities patch (version 0.4.4), part 3/4: introduce new capabilities
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]