From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 16:56:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20050830.165631.122559296.davem@davemloft.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Only process_die notifier in ia64_do_page_fault if KPROBES is configured. From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <200508310138.09841.ak@suse.de> References: <200508310138.09841.ak@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH] Only process_die notifier in ia64_do_page_fault if KPROBES is configured. Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 01:38:08 +0200 Return-Path: To: ak@suse.de Cc: tony.luck@intel.com, clameter@engr.sgi.com, rusty@linux.intel.com, rusty.lynch@intel.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, prasanna@in.ibm.com, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com List-ID: > On Wednesday 31 August 2005 01:05, Luck, Tony wrote: > > >Please do not generate any code if the feature cannot ever be > > >used (CONFIG_KPROBES off). With this patch we still have lots of > > >unnecessary code being executed on each page fault. > > > > I can (eventually) wrap this call inside the #ifdef CONFIG_KPROBES. > > At least the original die notifiers were designed as a generic debugger > interface, not a kprobes specific thing. So I don't think it's a good idea. Me neither, I think a way too big deal is being made about about this by the ia64 folks. Just put the dang hook in there unconditionally already :-) -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org