Hello.
Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
I would like to discuss your suggestion of moving the do_page_fault
instrumentation to handle_mm_fault. On one side, it helps removing architecture
dependant instrumentation, but on the other hand :
1- We cannot access the struct pt_regs in all cases (there may be an invalid
current task struct).
2- We cannot distinguish between calls to handle_mm_fault from the page fault
handler or from get_user_pages.
3- Some people complain about not having enough information about the cause of
the page fault (see the forward below).
So instead of staying between my users who ask for those feature and kernel
developers who wish to reduce the intrusiveness of instrumentation (which is a
nice goal : moving the syscall entry/exit instrumentation do do_syscall_trace
has helped simplifying the instrumentation), I prefer to open the discussion
about it.
It seems I've missed the whole story behind this move.
For me, it was more a question of consistency: if we're trying to trace
all trap handlers, why not page fault one? So, I just wanted my old LTT
tracepoints back. :-)
Ideas/comments are welcome.
Regards,
Mathieu
WBR, Sergei
-
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]
