Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752028Ab1FNPFD (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:05:03 -0400 Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.144]:58236 "EHLO e4.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750780Ab1FNPFB (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:05:01 -0400 Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 20:27:06 +0530 From: Srikar Dronamraju To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ingo Molnar , Steven Rostedt , Linux-mm , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Linus Torvalds , Masami Hiramatsu , Hugh Dickins , Christoph Hellwig , Andi Kleen , Thomas Gleixner , Jonathan Corbet , Oleg Nesterov , Andrew Morton , Jim Keniston , Roland McGrath , Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3.0-rc2-tip 2/22] 2: uprobes: Breakground page replacement. Message-ID: <20110614145706.GD4952@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: Srikar Dronamraju References: <20110607125804.28590.92092.sendpatchset@localhost6.localdomain6> <20110607125835.28590.25476.sendpatchset@localhost6.localdomain6> <1307660609.2497.1773.camel@laptop> <20110613085955.GD27130@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1308056249.19856.34.camel@twins> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1308056249.19856.34.camel@twins> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1084 Lines: 29 > > > > /* > > * NOTE: > > * Expect the breakpoint instruction to be the smallest size instruction for > > * the architecture. If an arch has variable length instruction and the > > * breakpoint instruction is not of the smallest length instruction > > * supported by that architecture then we need to modify read_opcode / > > * write_opcode accordingly. This would never be a problem for archs that > > * have fixed length instructions. > > */ > > Whoever reads comments anyway? :-) > > > Do we have archs which have a breakpoint instruction which isnt of the > > smallest instruction size for that arch. If we do have can we change the > > write_opcode/read_opcode while we support that architecture? > > Why not put a simple WARN_ON_ONCE() in there that checks the assumption? Okay, will do. -- Thanks and Regards Srikar -- 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/