This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
[Bug uprobes/4738] UPROBES_SSOL and URETPROBES must depend on UPROBES in Kconfig
- From: "ananth at in dot ibm dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org>
- To: systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 10 Jul 2007 04:53:20 -0000
- Subject: [Bug uprobes/4738] UPROBES_SSOL and URETPROBES must depend on UPROBES in Kconfig
- References: <20070704064428.4738.ananth@in.ibm.com>
- Reply-to: sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org
------- Additional Comments From ananth at in dot ibm dot com 2007-07-10 04:53 -------
Subject: Re: UPROBES_SSOL and URETPROBES must depend on UPROBES in Kconfig
On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 08:52:47PM -0000, jkenisto at us dot ibm dot com wrote:
>
> ------- Additional Comments From jkenisto at us dot ibm dot com 2007-07-09 20:52 -------
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > In which case, we have one of two choices:
> >
> > a> Make the dependency implicit as we do with kprobes (no KPROBES=y implies no
> > kretprobes either);
>
> That's pretty much what we're doing now.
>
> > this will require that we don't touch the Kconfig files,
> > except to add CONFIG_UPROBES.
>
> No, it doesn't require that. See advice from Dave Hansen, appended to this comment.
I disagree. If you follow that caveat, then why aren't KRETPROBES and
JPROBES in Kconfig?
> > b> If you want to retain the Kconfig entries for SSOL and URETPROBES, put in an
> > explicit dependency for the two on UPROBES. Per Kconfig language semantics, you
> > shouldn't be able to select a dependent feature without an explicit dependency
> > specified in the Kconfig file.
>
> Again, support for SSOL or uretprobes is not something we need/want the user to
> select.
>
> >
> > Need to choose one; You can't have both :-)
>
> I disagree. But I would be willing to consider the following modifications, if
> you'll test them and verify that (1) they do what you want and (2) SSOL and
> uretprobes do NOT show up as choices in make *config. (I ask you cuz you've
> already been experimenting with Kconfig changes.)
>
> config UPROBES_SSOL
> bool
> default y
> + depends on UPROBES
>
> config URETPROBES
> bool
> default y
> + depends on UPROBES
This is precisely what I've been asking for (dependency) and have suggested
in <b> above. I'd be happy with this change.
> Note that there should be no reason for arch-specific code to test
> CONFIG_UPROBES_SSOL or CONFIG_URETPROBES.
But that is orthogonal to this issue. My main point being, if I run
menuconfig on an arch that doesn't implement SSOL/URETPROBES, I
shouldn't be able to set them independently of UPROBES *and* more
importantly, they shouldn't show up if UPROBES=n.
Ananth
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4738
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.