Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030745AbaGRNv7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2014 09:51:59 -0400 Received: from cdptpa-outbound-snat.email.rr.com ([107.14.166.228]:41971 "EHLO cdptpa-oedge-vip.email.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932309AbaGRNvm (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2014 09:51:42 -0400 Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 09:51:32 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Masami Hiramatsu Cc: Josh Poimboeuf , Ingo Molnar , Namhyung Kim , Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH ftrace/core v3 2/3] ftrace, kprobes: Support IPMODIFY flag to find IP modify conflict Message-ID: <20140718095132.34c9179e@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <53C8C813.2060709@hitachi.com> References: <20140715060015.12195.74457.stgit@kbuild-fedora.novalocal> <20140715060028.12195.33527.stgit@kbuild-fedora.novalocal> <20140717144110.0fb00723@gandalf.local.home> <53C8C813.2060709@hitachi.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.10.1 (GTK+ 2.24.24; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RR-Connecting-IP: 107.14.168.130:25 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 18 Jul 2014 16:09:07 +0900 Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > "The ops can modify the IP register. This can only be set along with > > SAVE_REGS. If another ops is already registered for any of the > > functions that this ops will be registered for, then this ops will fail > > to register." > > Not only register, but also set_filter_ip ;) > "...will fail to register or set_filter_ip." Sure. > >> diff --git a/kernel/kprobes.c b/kernel/kprobes.c > >> index 3214289..e52d86f 100644 > >> --- a/kernel/kprobes.c > >> +++ b/kernel/kprobes.c > > > > I think this should be split into two patches. One that adds the ftrace > > infrastructure, and the other that adds the kprobes user of the > > IPMODIFY flag. > > Hmm, I thought that it was natural to introduce new feature and its user > together, so that we could use git-bisect safely. It should still be bisect friendly. That is, the feature is added before the user, not the user before the feature ;-) I know some people like the feature and user in one patch, but for me, when the user is in a different sub system (here it's kprobes) from the infrastructure that is changing (ftrace), I prefer separate patches. The user patch shows me where the users are. When they are one patch, I tend to have them get lost. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/