Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 18 Jul 2012 19:43:29 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] uprobe: fix misleading log entry | From | Jovi Zhang <> |
| |
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > * Jovi Zhang <bookjovi@gmail.com> [2012-07-18 11:08:42]: > >> From 68232ef2decae95b807f2f3763e8ea99c1a3b2ae Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: Jovi Zhang <bookjovi@gmail.com> >> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:51:26 +0800 >> Subject: [PATCH] uprobe: fix misleading log entry >> >> There don't have any 'r' prefix in uprobe event naming, remove it. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jovi Zhang <bookjovi@gmail.com> >> --- >> kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c >> index cf382de..852a584 100644 >> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c >> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c >> @@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ static int create_trace_uprobe(int argc, char **argv) >> if (argv[0][0] == '-') >> is_delete = true; >> else if (argv[0][0] != 'p') { >> - pr_info("Probe definition must be started with 'p', 'r' or" " '-'.\n"); >> + pr_info("Probe definition must be started with 'p' or '-'.\n"); >> return -EINVAL; >> } >> > > Yes, uprobes doesnt support return probes. So we should not have > mentioned about r. Hmm, Does this have specific reason? or just not implemented?
> > Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >
| |