Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753317Ab0HBJ3f (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Aug 2010 05:29:35 -0400 Received: from mail4.hitachi.co.jp ([133.145.228.5]:38922 "EHLO mail4.hitachi.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753021Ab0HBJ3e (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Aug 2010 05:29:34 -0400 X-AuditID: b753bd60-a92d1ba000005dcc-e5-4c568ffa46ad Message-ID: <4C568FF7.9070300@hitachi.com> Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 18:29:27 +0900 From: Masami Hiramatsu Organization: Systems Development Lab., Hitachi, Ltd., Japan User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Ingo Molnar , Frederic Weisbecker , Srikar Dronamraju , Peter Zijlstra , Steven Rostedt , Randy Dunlap , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Linus Torvalds , Oleg Nesterov , Mark Wielaard , Mathieu Desnoyers , Andrew Morton , Naren A Devaiah , Jim Keniston , "Frank Ch. Eigler" , Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli , LKML , "Paul E. McKenney" , 2nddept-manager@sdl.hitachi.co.jp, SystemTAP Subject: Re: [PATCHv10 2.6.35-rc6-tip 9/14] trace: uprobes trace_event interface References: <20100727110855.24690.26901.sendpatchset@localhost6.localdomain6> <20100727111045.24690.31897.sendpatchset@localhost6.localdomain6> <4C510BCE.4010704@hitachi.com> <20100802022055.GB5581@nowhere> <4C563F44.9080300@hitachi.com> <20100802074619.GA5292@nowhere> <20100802075637.GB24085@elte.hu> <20100802080032.GA12078@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20100802080032.GA12078@infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-FMFTCR: RANGEA Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1574 Lines: 43 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 09:56:37AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>>> Hmm, I disagree with it, because both Kprobes and Uprobes provides >>>> APIs for modules too. >>> I'm not sure there is a point in maintaining a leightweight version for out >>> of tree code. These modules could just select kprobes/uprobes events as >>> well. >>> >>> As you prefer, that was just a suggestion to make it more simple. >> The upstream policy always was that out of tree code does not exist as far as >> the kernel is concerned. So it is wrong to make the kernel crappier while >> helping out of tree code. > > Indeed. In addition to that the current version of uprobes does not > actually have any exported symbols. Ah, indeed. :-( And then, it conflicts with the description about uprobes in Documentation/uprobes.txt: > +Uprobes-based instrumentation can be packaged as a kernel > +module. In the simplest case, the module's init function installs > +("registers") one or more probes, and the exit function unregisters > +them. So, that could be a bug. Anyway, at least kprobes has some sample modules under samples/kprobes/. Aren't they in-tree consumers of kprobes? Thank you, -- Masami HIRAMATSU 2nd Research Dept. Hitachi, Ltd., Systems Development Laboratory E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com -- 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/