On 11/26, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > What the patches in the current form do is to introduce two different > ptrace implementations, with one used on the architectures getting most > testing and another secondary one for left over embedded or dead > architectures with horrible results.
Yes, nobody likes 2 implementations. I guess Roland and me hate CONFIG_UTRACE much more than anybody else. > So removing the old one is much > better. I am in no position to discuss this option. It is very easy to remove the old code and break !HAVE_ARCH_TRACEHOOK architectures. Although personally I am not sure this is practical. If we merge utrace, perhaps we will get more attention from maintainers, the old code will be "officially" deprecated/obsolete. I sent some trivial initial changes in arch/um/ a long ago, the patch was silently ignored. Even if I was able to fix arch/xxx myself, I don't understand how can I send the patches to maintainers until utrace is already merged in -mm at least. Oleg.
