Re: Workarounds for very useful developer userspace tracing scripts

[Jim Keniston <jkenisto at us dot ibm dot com>]

On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 21:12 +0100, argetek senvx wrote:
> Thanks, Jim!
> 
> Although a bit painful for folks like me not needing to mess with the
> kernel (anymore :-}), yet gotta admit this seems very very cool (not
> minding the interface - any stap guys listening? :-}).
 
Thanks.  I think the possibilities of kprobes + uprobes + utrace +
SystemTap are indeed cool.  I can assure you that stap guys are
listening.

> 
> I patched my Ubuntu Feisty kernel 2.6.20-16-386 with the utrace patch
> set.  Can you please point me to a uprobes patch that would apply to
> this cleanly?
> 
> I also checked a *dry-run* application of your patch on a Fedora7 box
> I have remote access to (kernel 2.6.21-1.3194.fc7 has utrace already):
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 2.6.21-1.3194.fc7-x86_64$ patch -up1 --dry-run < ~/uprobes.patch
> 
[Patch tribulations snipped]
> 
> Also, as you can see some of the files (probably added by the patch)
> prompt for a 'file to patch'.  Am I missing something?

I assume you're looking at the May 25/26 posting I mentioned, 
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/systemtap/2007-q2/msg00399.html

I was lazy and attached all 3 patches to that one post.  On some
mailers, they don't show up as separate attachments.  So the patch you
have may be all 3 patches concatentated.  Each patch ends with a line
containing a lone underscore (_), so they should be easy to separate.
Just apply them in order.  Was that the problem?

These patches should apply cleanly to any utrace-enabled kernel, with
the possible exceptions of the patches to the Makefiles and Kconfig
file, which should be easy to hand-patch.

> 
> Regards,
> 
>       ~ argetek

Thanks again.
Jim