This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the systemtap project.
Re: Fixed PR13146 by not allowing memory allocations to sleep (Was: [SCM] systemtap: system-wide probe/trace tool branch, master, updated. release-1.6-151-g8e794e9)
- From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth at in dot ibm dot com>
- To: David Smith <dsmith at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Jim Keniston <jkenisto at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, Josh Stone <jistone at redhat dot com>, Mark Wielaard <mjw at redhat dot com>, systemtap at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 21:30:18 +0530
- Subject: Re: Fixed PR13146 by not allowing memory allocations to sleep (Was: [SCM] systemtap: system-wide probe/trace tool branch, master, updated. release-1.6-151-g8e794e9)
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <4E82481E.email@example.com> <1317164453.3979.9.camel@localhost> <4E8C5FC3.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-to: ananth at in dot ibm dot com
On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 08:46:43AM -0500, David Smith wrote:
> On 09/27/2011 06:00 PM, Jim Keniston wrote:
> > I haven't seen this explicitly mentioned wrt this thread or PR13146, but
> > uprobes and uretprobe handlers (which are called from the utrace
> > report_signal callback) can sleep.
> For my information, can uprobe/uretprobe handlers sleep in the new
> uprobes being proposed upstream?
Yes, they can sleep. The handlers get called on the path back to
userspace (do_notify_resume()) similar to what utrace used to do.