> The utrace patch looks suspicious in utrace.h, which cause the compilation
> failure without CONFIG_UTRACE. I have confirmed that the git tree looks sane.
>
> +static inline void utrace_init_task(struct task_struct *child)
> +{
> +}
> +{
> +}
Oops! That snafu got fixed on the main branch but
Title: devis_entreprise
Si ce message
ne s'affiche pas correctement, visualisez
la version en ligne
Pour vous
assurer de recevoir notre lettre d'information, nous vous recommandons
d'ajouter l'adresse i...@fizeo.
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 12/21, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>>> Hmm. Now I see how wrong I was when I said this code is "obviously wrong" ;)
>
> Yes, it is easy to blame the code you don't understand.
>
> My apologies to all.
>
>>> I'll add the debugging printk's and report the ou
On 12/21, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Hmm. Now I see how wrong I was when I said this code is "obviously wrong" ;)
Yes, it is easy to blame the code you don't understand.
My apologies to all.
> > I'll add the debugging printk's and report the output. Sorry for delay,
> > c
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 02:11:40AM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> The patch adds the new file, kernel/ptrace-utrace.c, which contains
> the new implementation of ptrace over utrace.
>
> This file is not compiled until we have CONFIG_UTRACE option, will be
> added by the next "utrace core" patch.
>
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 07:18:37PM +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 02:11:40AM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > The patch adds the new file, kernel/ptrace-utrace.c, which contains
> > the new implementation of ptrace over utrace.
> >
> > This file is not compiled u
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 12/18, Roland McGrath wrote:
>>> Please find the trivial test-case below. It hangs, because
>>> PTRACE_SINGLESTEP doesn't trigger the trap.
>> 2.6.33-rc1 x86-64 works for me with either -m64 or -m32 version of that test.
>>
>>> (not sure this matters, but I did the testing
