This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the systemtap project.
FW: recent kprobe work
- From: "Lynch, Rusty" <rusty dot lynch at intel dot com>
- To: <systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 15:14:53 -0700
- Subject: FW: recent kprobe work
FYI, David pointed out that the return probe patch left out a needed
update to sparc64, but he also points out our abuse of the name space
with function names like arch_*.
Anyone have a problem with me kicking out a patch to move all the arch_*
function names to kprobes_arch_* ?
--rusty
-----Original Message-----
From: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Rusty Lynch
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 2:40 PM
To: David S. Miller
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: recent kprobe work
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 02:01:36PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
>
> Can the folks submitting all of the kprobe stuff at least consult me
> when they can't figure out how to implement the sparc64 kprobe variant
> for new features?
>
> Currently, the sparc64 build is broken by recent kprobe
> changes:
>
> kernel/built-in.o: In function `init_kprobes':
> : undefined reference to `arch_init'
>
> Also, can we use a more namespace friendly name for this kprobe layer
> specific function other than "arch_init()"?
>
> Thanks.
Sorry, just an oversight. We have several arch_* functions, maybe we
should
start using kprobes_arch_* instead.
--rusty
-
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/