From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26241 invoked by alias); 17 Dec 2007 19:17:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 26230 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Dec 2007 19:17:26 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME,DK_SIGNED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com (HELO rv-out-0910.google.com) (209.85.198.186) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:17:18 +0000 Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id l15so2044743rvb.50 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:17:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fmPo3HwSgGeK8ChH1kb+3hmlk5ZT1yXQEmiF763RUhk=; b=D0eGLI8tqjjYfNi0HXH3x3x+zC75qGNrwSRxSk6uqhfUkCp9jVgI9KQMDEUlQ0LktM2szuV7C/2qI528rl7HZgfwDwXW3lD+tiEV9qtnw6U2hP65fpDsW/TuHls6BO/nLKuTU0I+5XNi+PcIU8MpGHezPWdJkShQtlgzf8zYMVs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=JWTNfRmzeT5n1b8Vn988Bub4FcMA2VPVpzr1bX1rMIrBLXr3xsfdypSES4eSz4Os3EbrUdgvBUJ3GyeChvd33PdKJ0iN8UvPZwtezIUmGKILPzsxVZ3YAzRJ9TGzjS2X81zftjkcppgP/WesM9QHOMxc3ZWdm0GtrZN2CdfsORI= Received: by 10.140.188.10 with SMTP id l10mr2002067rvf.247.1197919036283; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:17:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.1.100? ( [216.19.190.48]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c36sm7904282rvf.2007.12.17.11.17.15 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:17:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [-mm][PATCH 0/6] (yet another) kprobes x86 code unification and boosters From: Harvey Harrison To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Masami Hiramatsu , Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli , Jim Keniston , Roland McGrath , Arjan van de Ven , prasanna@in.ibm.com, anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com, davem@davemloft.net, systemtap-ml , LKML In-Reply-To: <20071217163342.GA10495@elte.hu> References: <47669E87.1010506@redhat.com> <20071217163342.GA10495@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:17:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1197919042.23402.1.camel@brick> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact systemtap-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: systemtap-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-q4/txt/msg00516.txt.bz2 On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 17:33 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > I developed a series of patches which unifies kprobes code on x86 and > > introduces boosters on x86-64. These patches can be applied to > > 2.6.24-rc4-mm1. > > > > The purpose of this patchset is unifying kprobes_[32|64].[c|h] to > > kprobes.[c|h] for simplifying code maintenance. > > > > I know these patches are conflicting with Harvey's patch. We need to > > solve that. > > your series fixes the 64-bit crash that i was seeing, so i've picked it > up. Please work it out with Harvey which cleanups of him are not > included yet. > I thought the jprobe_saved_sp looked fishy on X86_64 in my unified set but I went bug-for-bug compatible I guess :-) If you look at my cleaned up set this was one of the main source of remaining ifdefs. Harvey