Re: [RFC] Design + prototype: Multiple handler sets per probe address

[William Cohen <wcohen at redhat dot com>]

Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
> William Cohen wrote:
...
> > I appologize for the verbose output. I have also attached output of 
> > the test results. There are some warning about allocating sleeping 
> > function.
>
>
> The warning appears only in one of the eight runs. Will investigate
> this. A GFP_KERNEL/GFP_ATOMIC issue, probably - but if so, why only in
> one of the eight runs? Beats me!

I suspect that is the first time that kprobes needs to really allocate 
memory. The remaining kprobes can uses that access from iteration 1 of 
the loop.

...

> > It seems like it would be useful to have unregister_kprobe() return 
> > whether the operation was successful or not. Be able to catch cases 
> > were code attempts to remove a probe twice.
>
>
> Changing the existing interface :-) But I suppose users who don't care
> about the return code may as well ignore it.

It was a thought. Trying to make the code be better able to determine 
when something has gone wrong.

-Will