* Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com [2009-10-26 04:28:46]:
@@ -169,9 +164,9 @@ static inline void ptrace_init_task(stru
INIT_LIST_HEAD(child-ptraced);
child-parent = child-real_parent;
child-ptrace = 0;
- if (unlikely(ptrace)) {
+ if (unlikely(ptrace) (current-ptrace
Title: IC telecom
Si ce message ne s'affiche pas correctement, visualisez la version en ligne
La
réduction des coûts généraux est un enjeu crucial pour
I'm skeptical this is the desireable way to move the code around.
Of course, for all such things, I am fine with whatever upstream likes.
But here are my concerns:
That is not friendly to git history at all. If you move big chunks of code
to different files, it's ideal to do it in a sequence of
[I have no idea why you appended this to that message introducing patches
that are not related to this at all. Please use separate threads for
separate topics, and choose clearly apropos Subject: lines.]
I am thinking how can we fix utrace_control(SINGLESTEP). I don't
have good ideas so far.
On 10/27, Roland McGrath wrote:
I'm skeptical this is the desireable way to move the code around.
Of course, for all such things, I am fine with whatever upstream likes.
But here are my concerns:
I am not sure this is the best choice too.
That is not friendly to git history at all.
Yes, I
On 10/27, Roland McGrath wrote:
[I have no idea why you appended this to that message introducing patches
that are not related to this at all. Please use separate threads for
separate topics, and choose clearly apropos Subject: lines.]
OK.
I am thinking how can we fix
5/7 belongs first and I've already merged it as prerequisite to utrace.
We can send that upstream without delay. I hope it can get queued quickly
regardless of the review delays for the utrace and ptrace work.
All the other preparatory patches are just to introduce PT_PTRACED as the
distinction
Not sure I understand. Do you mean it is possible to move the code from
the old file to the new one in a git-friendly manner? Afaics, there is no
way to do this, git can only hanlde renames. (but my git skills is close
to zero).
What I meant is a sequence of patches like:
1. move non-common
On 10/28, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
As for ptrace. If utrace_control(SINGLESTEP) doesn't set TIF_SINGLESTEP,
then we need more (probably nasty) changes. report_quiesce/interrupt should
somehow figure out whether we need send_sigtrap() if -resume == XXXSTEP.
Or. We can add the hack below for V1,
On 10/27, Roland McGrath wrote:
In this case kernelptrace.c becomes
... the context of kernel/ptrace-common.h ...
#ifndef CONFIG_UTRACE
... other code ...
#endif
and we don't need CONFIG_PTRACE_OLD.
Do you agree with approach?
That's what I had in mind.
Not sure I understand... This is like utrace-vfork_stop:1, it is
only visible to utrace code.
Show me the change the the utrace_control kerneldoc wording that makes it
match what difference you propose this implementation detail would make.
When you consider other engines using UTRACE_BLOCKSTEP
On 10/27, Roland McGrath wrote:
5/7 belongs first and I've already merged it as prerequisite to utrace.
We can send that upstream without delay. I hope it can get queued quickly
regardless of the review delays for the utrace and ptrace work.
Agreed, I'll send it to Andrew.
All the other
On 10/27, Roland McGrath wrote:
Not sure I understand... This is like utrace-vfork_stop:1, it is
only visible to utrace code.
Show me the change the the utrace_control kerneldoc wording that makes it
match what difference you propose this implementation detail would make.
When you
On 10/27, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 04:28:52AM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
No functional changes, preparation for utrace-ptrace.
Introduce kernel/ptrace.h and move the code which can be shared
with the new implementation into this new header.
Did you
--- /dev/null 2009-10-25 19:46:00.608018007 +0100
+++ V1/kernel/ptrace-utrace.c 2009-10-26 03:56:46.0 +0100
Generally, needs more comments. That's not news, I'm sure.
But just giving reactions as I would if doing upstream review
without other context.
+struct ptrace_context {
+
15 matches
Mail list logo
