On 06/13/2016 08:45 PM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:

On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 11:22:47 -0400
David Long [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 06/13/2016 02:50 AM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:

quoted

On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 00:10:29 -0400
David Long [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

---
    arch/arm64/Kconfig                      |   1 +
    arch/arm64/include/asm/debug-monitors.h |   5 +
    arch/arm64/include/asm/insn.h           |   4 +-
    arch/arm64/include/asm/kprobes.h        |  60 ++++
    arch/arm64/include/asm/probes.h         |  44 +++
    arch/arm64/kernel/Makefile              |   1 +
    arch/arm64/kernel/debug-monitors.c      |  18 +-
    arch/arm64/kernel/kprobes-arm64.c       | 144 +++++++++
    arch/arm64/kernel/kprobes-arm64.h       |  35 +++
    arch/arm64/kernel/kprobes.c             | 526 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Not sure why kprobes.c and kprobes-arm64.c are splitted.

This comes from the model of the arm32 kprobes code where handling of
the low-level instruction simulation is implemented in separate files
for 32-bit vs. thumb instructions.  It should make a little more sense
in the future when additional instruction simulation code will hopefully
be added for those instructions we cannot currently single-step
out-of-line.  It also probably *could* be merged into one file.

Hmm, at least the name of arch/arm64/kernel/kprobes-arm64.c is
meaningless. As we've done in x86, I think we can make it
arch/arm64/kernel/kprobes/decode-insn.{c,h}

I've changed the name to kprobe-decode-insn.[hc], or do you feel
strongly the three kprobes source files in arch/arm64/kernel need their
own subdirectory?

Yes, especially when we start working on kprobes-on-ftrace support,
it is better to have a separate file for that.

I've reorganized the kprobes source files into their own subdirectory 
and changed some of their names.

Thank you!

Thanks,
-dl