On Mon, 18 Nov 2019 22:04:28 -0800
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I took your for-next without the extra patch and used it from bpf trampoline.
> It's looking good so far. Passed basic testing. Will add more stress tests.
>
> Do you mind doing:
> diff --git a/include/linux/ftrace.h b/include/linux/ftrace.h
> index 73eb2e93593f..6ddb203ca550 100644
> --- a/include/linux/ftrace.h
> +++ b/include/linux/ftrace.h
> @@ -256,16 +256,16 @@ struct ftrace_direct_func
> *ftrace_find_direct_func(unsigned long addr);
> # define ftrace_direct_func_count 0
> static inline int register_ftrace_direct(unsigned long ip, unsigned long addr)
> {
> - return -ENODEV;
> + return -ENOTSUPP;
> }
> static inline int unregister_ftrace_direct(unsigned long ip, unsigned
> long addr)
> {
> - return -ENODEV;
> + return -ENOTSUPP;
> }
> static inline int modify_ftrace_direct(unsigned long ip,
> unsigned long old_addr,
> unsigned long new_addr)
> {
> - return -ENODEV;
> + return -ENOTSUPP;
> }
>
> otherwise ENODEV is a valid error when ip is incorrect which is
> indistinguishable from ftrace not compiled in.
Sure I can add this. Want to add a Signed-off-by to it, and I'll just
pull it in directly? I can write up the change log.
-- Steve
