On 03/13, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
>
> @@ -1053,6 +1056,9 @@ int uprobe_mmap(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> struct uprobe *uprobe, *u;
> struct inode *inode;
>
> + if (uprobe_mmap_callback)
> + uprobe_mmap_callback(vma);
> +
> if (no_uprobe_events() || !valid_vma(vma, true))
> return 0;
probe_event_enable() does
uprobe_register();
/* WINDOW */
sdt_increment_ref_ctr();
what if uprobe_mmap() is called in between? The counter(s) in this vma
will be incremented twice, no?
> +static struct vm_area_struct *
> +sdt_find_vma(struct mm_struct *mm, struct trace_uprobe *tu)
> +{
> + struct vm_area_struct *tmp;
> +
> + for (tmp = mm->mmap; tmp != NULL; tmp = tmp->vm_next)
> + if (sdt_valid_vma(tu, tmp))
> + return tmp;
> +
> + return NULL;
I can't understand the logic... Lets ignore sdt_valid_vma() for now.
The caller has uprobe_map_info, why it can't simply do
vma = find_vma(uprobe_map_info->vaddr)? and then check sdt_valid_vma().
Oleg.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
