On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Chris Metcalf <cmetc...@tilera.com> wrote: > On 12/17/2012 5:07 PM, Simon Marchi wrote: >>> I think with this support added, we have all the prerequisites to add >>> "select HAVE_ARCH_TRACEHOOK" under "config TILE" in arch/tile/Kconfig, so >>> we might as well do that too. That will enable PTRACE_GETREGSET and >>> PTRACE_SETREGSET, as well as /proc/PID/syscall, so why not? >> This is indeed my objective ;), and it is an intermediate objective to >> add support for HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS. If we look at arch/Kconfig, >> just above HAVE_ARCH_TRACEHOOK, we still have >> >> TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE calls tracehook_report_syscall_{entry,exit} >> TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME calls tracehook_notify_resume() >> signal delivery calls tracehook_signal_handler() > > I believe we do properly support TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE; see > arch/tile/kernel/intvec_64.S. Likewise TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME; see > do_work_pending() in arch/tile/kernel/process.c. And signal delivery seems > to be handled in a platform-independent way now; see kernel/signal.c.
TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE is handled, but it doesn't call tracehook_report_syscall_{entry,exit} as specified. The two others seem handled like you said. > My only comment on the revised patch is that I believe you should #include > <arch/chip.h>, not <uapi/arch/chip.h>. Source code (.c files) doesn't seem > to use the <uapi/> prefix. Oh, I didn't know the include path contained arch/tile/include/uapi directly. Fixing it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/