)]}'
{
  "log": [
    {
      "commit": "ea32c65cc2d2294c04e9f81d0578a6f51febfdbf",
      "tree": "b301766bcc903f982b0ae85b5edffe9477a65408",
      "parents": [
        "89cb14c0dd0e4a7d0315d19f449389c4d49237ee"
      ],
      "author": {
        "name": "Prasanna S Panchamukhi",
        "email": "prasanna@in.ibm.com",
        "time": "Thu Jun 23 00:09:36 2005 -0700"
      },
      "committer": {
        "name": "Linus Torvalds",
        "email": "torvalds@ppc970.osdl.org",
        "time": "Thu Jun 23 09:45:24 2005 -0700"
      },
      "message": "[PATCH] kprobes: Temporary disarming of reentrant probe\n\nIn situations where a kprobes handler calls a routine which has a probe on it,\nthen kprobes_handler() disarms the new probe forever.  This patch removes the\nabove limitation by temporarily disarming the new probe.  When the another\nprobe hits while handling the old probe, the kprobes_handler() saves previous\nkprobes state and handles the new probe without calling the new kprobes\nregistered handlers.  kprobe_post_handler() restores back the previous kprobes\nstate and the normal execution continues.\n\nHowever on x86_64 architecture, re-rentrancy is provided only through\npre_handler().  If a routine having probe is referenced through\npost_handler(), then the probes on that routine are disarmed forever, since\nthe exception stack is gets changed after the processor single steps the\ninstruction of the new probe.\n\nThis patch includes generic changes to support temporary disarming on\nreentrancy of probes.\n\nSigned-of-by: Prasanna S Panchamukhi \u003cprasanna@in.ibm.com\u003e\n\nSigned-off-by: Andrew Morton \u003cakpm@osdl.org\u003e\nSigned-off-by: Linus Torvalds \u003ctorvalds@osdl.org\u003e\n"
    },
    {
      "commit": "0aa55e4d7db822059fe8132fe9f2b7773c48216c",
      "tree": "84075ac377f29f393aff802f00def309a98bcf40",
      "parents": [
        "7e1048b11c5afe79aac46a42e3ccec86b8365c6d"
      ],
      "author": {
        "name": "Hien Nguyen",
        "email": "hien@us.ibm.com",
        "time": "Thu Jun 23 00:09:26 2005 -0700"
      },
      "committer": {
        "name": "Linus Torvalds",
        "email": "torvalds@ppc970.osdl.org",
        "time": "Thu Jun 23 09:45:21 2005 -0700"
      },
      "message": "[PATCH] kprobes: moves lock-unlock to non-arch kprobe_flush_task\n\nThis patch moves the lock/unlock of the arch specific kprobe_flush_task()\nto the non-arch specific kprobe_flusk_task().\n\nSigned-off-by: Hien Nguyen \u003chien@us.ibm.com\u003e\nAcked-by: Prasanna S Panchamukhi \u003cprasanna@in.ibm.com\u003e\nSigned-off-by: Andrew Morton \u003cakpm@osdl.org\u003e\nSigned-off-by: Linus Torvalds \u003ctorvalds@osdl.org\u003e\n"
    },
    {
      "commit": "7e1048b11c5afe79aac46a42e3ccec86b8365c6d",
      "tree": "4f9caee0153e688f22d7e7b6fdc62e35be4fc3fe",
      "parents": [
        "73649dab0fd524cb8545a8cb83c6eaf77b107105"
      ],
      "author": {
        "name": "Rusty Lynch",
        "email": "rusty.lynch@intel.com",
        "time": "Thu Jun 23 00:09:25 2005 -0700"
      },
      "committer": {
        "name": "Linus Torvalds",
        "email": "torvalds@ppc970.osdl.org",
        "time": "Thu Jun 23 09:45:21 2005 -0700"
      },
      "message": "[PATCH] Move kprobe [dis]arming into arch specific code\n\nThe architecture independent code of the current kprobes implementation is\narming and disarming kprobes at registration time.  The problem is that the\ncode is assuming that arming and disarming is a just done by a simple write\nof some magic value to an address.  This is problematic for ia64 where our\ninstructions look more like structures, and we can not insert break points\nby just doing something like:\n\n*p-\u003eaddr \u003d BREAKPOINT_INSTRUCTION;\n\nThe following patch to 2.6.12-rc4-mm2 adds two new architecture dependent\nfunctions:\n\n     * void arch_arm_kprobe(struct kprobe *p)\n     * void arch_disarm_kprobe(struct kprobe *p)\n\nand then adds the new functions for each of the architectures that already\nimplement kprobes (spar64/ppc64/i386/x86_64).\n\nI thought arch_[dis]arm_kprobe was the most descriptive of what was really\nhappening, but each of the architectures already had a disarm_kprobe()\nfunction that was really a \"disarm and do some other clean-up items as\nneeded when you stumble across a recursive kprobe.\" So...  I took the\nliberty of changing the code that was calling disarm_kprobe() to call\narch_disarm_kprobe(), and then do the cleanup in the block of code dealing\nwith the recursive kprobe case.\n\nSo far this patch as been tested on i386, x86_64, and ppc64, but still\nneeds to be tested in sparc64.\n\nSigned-off-by: Rusty Lynch \u003crusty.lynch@intel.com\u003e\nSigned-off-by: Anil S Keshavamurthy \u003canil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com\u003e\nSigned-off-by: Andrew Morton \u003cakpm@osdl.org\u003e\nSigned-off-by: Linus Torvalds \u003ctorvalds@osdl.org\u003e\n"
    },
    {
      "commit": "b94cce926b2b902b79380ccba370d6f9f2980de0",
      "tree": "da2680b1ec36eae6423ba446d09284d2642ae82b",
      "parents": [
        "2fa389c5eb8c97d621653184d2adf5fdbd4a3167"
      ],
      "author": {
        "name": "Hien Nguyen",
        "email": "hien@us.ibm.com",
        "time": "Thu Jun 23 00:09:19 2005 -0700"
      },
      "committer": {
        "name": "Linus Torvalds",
        "email": "torvalds@ppc970.osdl.org",
        "time": "Thu Jun 23 09:45:21 2005 -0700"
      },
      "message": "[PATCH] kprobes: function-return probes\n\nThis patch adds function-return probes to kprobes for the i386\narchitecture.  This enables you to establish a handler to be run when a\nfunction returns.\n\n1. API\n\nTwo new functions are added to kprobes:\n\n\tint register_kretprobe(struct kretprobe *rp);\n\tvoid unregister_kretprobe(struct kretprobe *rp);\n\n2. Registration and unregistration\n\n2.1 Register\n\n  To register a function-return probe, the user populates the following\n  fields in a kretprobe object and calls register_kretprobe() with the\n  kretprobe address as an argument:\n\n  kp.addr - the function\u0027s address\n\n  handler - this function is run after the ret instruction executes, but\n  before control returns to the return address in the caller.\n\n  maxactive - The maximum number of instances of the probed function that\n  can be active concurrently.  For example, if the function is non-\n  recursive and is called with a spinlock or mutex held, maxactive \u003d 1\n  should be enough.  If the function is non-recursive and can never\n  relinquish the CPU (e.g., via a semaphore or preemption), NR_CPUS should\n  be enough.  maxactive is used to determine how many kretprobe_instance\n  objects to allocate for this particular probed function.  If maxactive \u003c\u003d\n  0, it is set to a default value (if CONFIG_PREEMPT maxactive\u003dmax(10, 2 *\n  NR_CPUS) else maxactive\u003dNR_CPUS)\n\n  For example:\n\n    struct kretprobe rp;\n    rp.kp.addr \u003d /* entrypoint address */\n    rp.handler \u003d /*return probe handler */\n    rp.maxactive \u003d /* e.g., 1 or NR_CPUS or 0, see the above explanation */\n    register_kretprobe(\u0026rp);\n\n  The following field may also be of interest:\n\n  nmissed - Initialized to zero when the function-return probe is\n  registered, and incremented every time the probed function is entered but\n  there is no kretprobe_instance object available for establishing the\n  function-return probe (i.e., because maxactive was set too low).\n\n2.2 Unregister\n\n  To unregiter a function-return probe, the user calls\n  unregister_kretprobe() with the same kretprobe object as registered\n  previously.  If a probed function is running when the return probe is\n  unregistered, the function will return as expected, but the handler won\u0027t\n  be run.\n\n3. Limitations\n\n3.1 This patch supports only the i386 architecture, but patches for\n    x86_64 and ppc64 are anticipated soon.\n\n3.2 Return probes operates by replacing the return address in the stack\n    (or in a known register, such as the lr register for ppc).  This may\n    cause __builtin_return_address(0), when invoked from the return-probed\n    function, to return the address of the return-probes trampoline.\n\n3.3 This implementation uses the \"Multiprobes at an address\" feature in\n    2.6.12-rc3-mm3.\n\n3.4 Due to a limitation in multi-probes, you cannot currently establish\n    a return probe and a jprobe on the same function.  A patch to remove\n    this limitation is being tested.\n\nThis feature is required by SystemTap (http://sourceware.org/systemtap),\nand reflects ideas contributed by several SystemTap developers, including\nWill Cohen and Ananth Mavinakayanahalli.\n\nSigned-off-by: Hien Nguyen \u003chien@us.ibm.com\u003e\nSigned-off-by: Prasanna S Panchamukhi \u003cprasanna@in.ibm.com\u003e\nSigned-off-by: Frederik Deweerdt \u003cfrederik.deweerdt@laposte.net\u003e\nSigned-off-by: Andrew Morton \u003cakpm@osdl.org\u003e\nSigned-off-by: Linus Torvalds \u003ctorvalds@osdl.org\u003e\n"
    },
    {
      "commit": "64f562c6df3cfc5d1b2b4bdbcb7951457df9c237",
      "tree": "5fecfd97cfa1965185ec2254668d90d8f03e3f5f",
      "parents": [
        "04dea5f93231204cc3ca0ab793ce76dbb10c86ba"
      ],
      "author": {
        "name": "Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli",
        "email": "amavin@redhat.com",
        "time": "Thu May 05 16:15:42 2005 -0700"
      },
      "committer": {
        "name": "Linus Torvalds",
        "email": "torvalds@ppc970.osdl.org",
        "time": "Thu May 05 16:36:39 2005 -0700"
      },
      "message": "[PATCH] kprobes: Allow multiple kprobes at the same address\n\nAllow registration of multiple kprobes at an address in an architecture\nagnostic way.  Corresponding handlers will be invoked in a sequence.  But,\na kprobe and a jprobe can\u0027t (yet) co-exist at the same address.\n\nSigned-off-by: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli \u003camavin@redhat.com\u003e\nSigned-off-by: Andrew Morton \u003cakpm@osdl.org\u003e\nSigned-off-by: Linus Torvalds \u003ctorvalds@osdl.org\u003e\n"
    },
    {
      "commit": "1da177e4c3f41524e886b7f1b8a0c1fc7321cac2",
      "tree": "0bba044c4ce775e45a88a51686b5d9f90697ea9d",
      "parents": [],
      "author": {
        "name": "Linus Torvalds",
        "email": "torvalds@ppc970.osdl.org",
        "time": "Sat Apr 16 15:20:36 2005 -0700"
      },
      "committer": {
        "name": "Linus Torvalds",
        "email": "torvalds@ppc970.osdl.org",
        "time": "Sat Apr 16 15:20:36 2005 -0700"
      },
      "message": "Linux-2.6.12-rc2\n\nInitial git repository build. I\u0027m not bothering with the full history,\neven though we have it. We can create a separate \"historical\" git\narchive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it\u0027s about\n3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early\ngit days unnecessarily complicated, when we don\u0027t have a lot of good\ninfrastructure for it.\n\nLet it rip!\n"
    }
  ]
}