On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 00:17:24 +0200, Roland McGrath wrote:
For any test case you found useful, please add it to the ptrace-tests
suite. Jan can help you get it in the right form and get it committed.
Checked-in as:
I'll point out that the only symptom that matters to ptrace is -exit_code
and that issue disappears if you stop overloading it for ptrace purposes,
which is the clean thing to do in the long run anyway. But there are
subtler issues that haven't yet directly affected ptrace.
In this scenario, the
With current utrace it is no longer a fulltime assignment so it is OK this
way.
Thanks for tending the suite, it's been very helpful.
Roland
On 09/14, Roland McGrath wrote:
Basically, we have ev_push() and ev_pop(), that is all.
I don't mean it's hard to understand what the code does.
It's clear enough that it's a simple ring buffer scheme.
But just having that extra data structure is extra complexity and storage
even so.
Confused... Do you think something is wrong with the current code?
No, I was just being explicit about the nonobvious quirks of the semantics.
(They merit some comments in the eventual code.)
IOW, I assume this test-case
[...]
is right, correct?
Yes.
Thanks,
Roland
