lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Apr]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: Two fixes for 2.4.19-pre5-ac3
    From
    Date
    "Philippe Elie" <phil.el@wanadoo.fr> writes:

    > From: "Bill Davidsen" <davidsen@tmr.com>
    > Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 4:48 PM
    >

    > > For legitimate use, if any, a compile-time optional system call could be
    > > added requiring a capability to use, and programs which are currently
    > > doing that (AFS?) can be converted to use another f/s interface. I have
    > > seen a few mentions of software which DO use that capability, I'm not sure
    > > I've seen one which can be done no other way.
    >
    > As stated oprofile needs it, there is no other efficient way to track exec,
    > mmap and other sys call needed for profiler. I hope a consensus can
    > be reach : explain than unloading module wich patch the sys call table
    > are unsafe on SMP, discourage the use of sys call table patch, but do
    > not forbid that.

    In times past when people were working on the vm86 system call you needed
    a modified version of insmod, that could read System.map.

    If you are going to be doing strange things I don't see why that shouldn't
    still be required.

    Though I am wondering if the sane approach for a profiler might not to be
    have a kernel conditional compilation directive that simply patches
    the syscall path. The overhead is probably less as well.

    Eric
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:25    [W:0.021 / U:0.524 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site