Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rusty Lynch" <> | Subject | Re: Multiple kprobes per address | Date | Mon, 11 Nov 2002 10:35:56 -0800 |
| |
I was really only concerned with multiple consumers of kprobes. So if I were to create some tool that used kpobes to hook into the kernel, and someone else were to create another tool that solved a different problem but also used kprobes then the two tools wouldn't play nice with each other.
-rustyl
----- Original Message ----- From: "Vamsi Krishna S ." <vamsi@in.ibm.com> To: "Rusty Lynch" <rusty@linux.co.intel.com> Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 12:05 AM Subject: Re: Multiple kprobes per address
> Hi, > > On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 01:00:26PM -0800, Rusty Lynch wrote: > > I noticed that kprobes is designed around the idea of only allowing > > a single probe point per probe address. Why not allow multiple probe > > points for a given probe address? Is it a way of limiting complexity? > > > We didn't think it would be useful and conceptually, it is simpler to > think of one probe at an address. > > > It looks like it would be fairly straight forward to change get_kprobe(addr) > > to be get_kprobes(addr) where it returns a list of probe points associated > > with the address, and then tweak do_int3 to work through the entire list. > > Would such a change be acceptable? > > > It will be trivial to add this, but why? Is there a good reason > for wanting to do this (multiple kprobes at same address) as opposed > to doing all you want done on a probe hit in a single handler? > > Regards, > Vamsi. > -- > Vamsi Krishna S. > Linux Technology Center, > IBM Software Lab, Bangalore. > Ph: +91 80 5044959 > Internet: vamsi@in.ibm.com
- 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/
| |