This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
Re: [RFC][Patch 1/4] kprobe fast unregistration
- From: Christoph Hellwig <hch at infradead dot org>
- To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "Stone, Joshua I" <joshua dot i dot stone at intel dot com>, "Keshavamurthy, Anil S" <anil dot s dot keshavamurthy at intel dot com>, Masami Hiramatsu <masami dot hiramatsu dot pt at hitachi dot com>, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth at in dot ibm dot com>, Prasanna S Panchamukhi <prasanna at in dot ibm dot com>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org>, SystemTAP <systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com>, Satoshi Oshima <soshima at redhat dot com>, Hideo Aoki <haoki at redhat dot com>, Yumiko Sugita <yumiko dot sugita dot yf at hitachi dot com>, hch at infradead dot org
- Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 14:01:49 +0100
- Subject: Re: [RFC][Patch 1/4] kprobe fast unregistration
- References: <20070323180527.GA13728@bambi.jf.intel.com> <16D5B9AB904B0B46B22A27002EE3A8C82793BB@scsmsx415.amr.corp.intel.com> <20070323182248.GA32364@redhat.com>
On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 02:22:48PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Really? What possible problems can occur? The worst that occurs to
> me is that if someone forgets to call the commit function, the kprobes
> will still be disabled, but memory won't be recycled for a while.
Exactly. It's a very unintuitive interface, exposing implementation
details to the user. The array variant otoh is obvious to the user:
gice me an array of probes to register/unregister and do it.
> Would it be possible to allay even that concern with an automated
> deferred/periodic commit?
That's even worse from the user perspective interface.