lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Nov]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v7 3.2-rc2 5/30] uprobes: copy of the original instruction.
    From
    Date
    On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 14:49 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
    > On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 19:40 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
    > > On Fri, 2011-11-18 at 16:37 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
    > > > + /* TODO : Analysis and verification of instruction */
    > >
    > > As in refuse to set a breakpoint on an instruction we can't deal with?
    > >
    > > Do we care? The worst case we'll crash the program, but if we're allowed
    > > setting uprobes we already have enough privileges to do that anyway,
    > > right?
    >
    > Well, I wouldn't be happy if I was running a server, and needed to
    > analyze something it was doing, and because I screwed up the location of
    > my probe, I crash the server, made lots of people unhappy and lose my
    > job over it.
    >
    > I think we do care, but it can be a TODO item.

    But but but, why not let userspace sort it? And if you're going to
    provide the kernel with inode:offset data yourself, you're already well
    aware of wtf you're doing.




    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2011-11-23 21:55    [W:3.668 / U:0.020 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site