On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 16:58:49 +0000 Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> wrote: > This looks fine to me, but I'm curious about whether this is supposed to > work with compat syscalls as well, where the prefix is "__arm64_compat_". > > If we broadly follow the x86 lead, we'd have: > > return (!strncmp(sym, "__arm64_", 8) && !strcmp(sym + 8, name)) || > (!strncmp(sym, "__arm64_compat_", 15) && !strcmp(sym + 15, name)); > > Do we need to handle compat (i.e. 32-bit) tasks here? Only if you want to trace compat syscalls as well ;-) -- Steve
