On 11/18, Roland McGrath wrote: > > I added tracehook_init_task() in my tree. I don't see much benefit in > sending any tracehook patch upstream for this. tracehook_init_task() > corresponds to tracehook_free_task(), which is only added by utrace > (and both would just be empty in a separate preparatory patch). > > I don't see any reason to fiddle the ptrace_init_task() call. > ... > In the long run, the ptrace init stuff will all just go away.
OK, agreed. Oleg.
