On 2019/3/4 18:12, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 08:25:28AM +0000, Haibo Xu (Arm Technology China)
> wrote:
>> On 2019/3/1 2:32, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>> Now that we have a new hook ptrace_syscall_enter that can be called from
>>> syscall entry code a
On 2019/3/1 2:32, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Now that we have a new hook ptrace_syscall_enter that can be called from
> syscall entry code and it handles PTRACE_SYSEMU in generic code, we
> can do some cleanup using the same in do_syscall_trace_enter.
>
> Cc: Oleg Nesterov
> Cc: Paul Mackerras
> Cc: M
On 2019/3/1 2:32, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Now that we have a new hook ptrace_syscall_enter that can be called from
> syscall entry code and it handles PTRACE_SYSEMU in generic code, we
> can do some cleanup using the same in syscall_trace_enter.
>
> Further the extra logic to find single stepping PTR
On 2019/3/1 2:32, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Currently each architecture handles PTRACE_SYSEMU in very similar way.
> It's completely arch independent and can be handled in the code helping
> to consolidate PTRACE_SYSEMU handling.
>
> Let's introduce a hook 'ptrace_syscall_enter' that arch specific sysc
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 03:45:51AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 4. September 2018, 04:11:07 CEST schrieb Haibo Xu (Arm
> Technology China):
> > Hi Richard,
> >
> > What do you mean by done it in the core? moving macro definition to
> > include/uap
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 03:45:51AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 4. September 2018, 04:11:07 CEST schrieb Haibo Xu (Arm
> Technology China):
> > Hi Richard,
> >
> > What do you mean by done it in the core? moving macro definition to
> > include/uap
to
include/uapi/linux/ptrace.h?
The patch is strictly follow x86's sematic on PTRACE_SYSEMU/SINGLESTEP support.
> > I wonder what Haibo Xu want to do with PTRACE_SYSEMU on arm64.
> > Are you porting UML or gvisor to arm64?
>
> That's a good question. Haibo?
The st
7 matches
Mail list logo
