[lkml]   [2008]   [Jan]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCHv2] kprobes: Introduce is_kprobe_fault()
    On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 09:45 +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
    > Harvey Harrison writes:
    > > Use a central is_kprobe_fault() inline in kprobes.h to remove all
    > > of the arch-dependant, practically identical implementations in
    > > avr32, ia64, powerpc, s390, sparc64, and x86.
    > I don't like the name "is_kprobe_fault" since the function actually
    > handles the fault - i.e. it does more than just tell the caller
    > whether this is a kprobes fault. Something like
    > "handle_kprobes_fault" or "maybe_handle_kprobes_fault" would be
    > better IMO.

    Good point, I chose the name based simply on the usage pattern found
    in all the callers. Of your suggestions I like handle_kprobes_fault

    How about check_kprobes_fault? That seems to cover what you were
    getting at with maybe_handle_kprobes_fault but is shorter. That
    also fits better with the !CONFIG_KPROBES case.


     \ /
      Last update: 2008-01-09 00:05    [W:0.020 / U:41.460 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site