> I do have a really large objection of merging the current messy double > ptrace implementation. If current utrace based ptrace isn't 100% ready > there's absolutely no point in merging it.
There is no "current" utrace-ptrace implementation. I haven't proposed one for merging. When one is ready and working, we can discuss its actual technical details then. > Other user would be even better, e.g. the seccomp rewrite. The seccomp rewrite is a very simple user for which I have a prototype patch. (It needs testing, but that should be easy enough.) The only real complexity there is in deciding how to merge those changes. Its components are: * clean up Kconfig * remove old arch/asm hooks ** mips ** powerpc ** sh ** sparc ** x86 * replace kernel/seccomp.c with utrace-based one Except for the first one, doing it in small incremental changes would leave some intermediate states with no seccomp feature usable in the tree. (And, of course, CONFIG_SECCOMP will require CONFIG_UTRACE thereafter.) Please advise on how many pieces to slice it into and how to stage the merging. Thanks, Roland
