On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 7:21 PM Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 19:03:43 -0700 > Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 4:41 AM Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:05:26 +0100 > > > Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 11:34:59AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > > > Add rethook for x86 implementation. Most of the code has been copied from > > > > > kretprobes on x86. > > > > > > > > Right; as said, I'm really unhappy with growing a carbon copy of this > > > > stuff instead of sharing. Can we *please* keep it a single instance? > > > > > > OK, then let me update the kprobe side too. > > > > > > > Them being basically indentical, it should be trivial to have > > > > CONFIG_KPROBE_ON_RETHOOK (or somesuch) and just share this. > > > > > > Yes, ideally it should use CONFIG_HAVE_RETHOOK since the rethook arch port > > > must be a copy of the kretprobe implementation. But for safety, I think > > > having CONFIG_KPROBE_ON_RETHOOK is a good idea until replacing all kretprobe > > > implementations. > > > > Masami, > > > > you're respinning this patch to combine > > arch_rethook_trampoline and __kretprobe_trampoline > > right? > > Yes, let me send the first patch set (for x86 at first). great > BTW, can you review these 2 patches? These are only for the fprobes, > so it can be picked to bpf-next. > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/164802091567.1732982.1242854551611267542.stgit@devnote2/T/#u Yes. They look good. Will push them soon.
