Hi - On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 05:25:13AM -0500, ty...@mit.edu wrote: > [...] > > > The killer app for this will be the ability to delete thousands of > > > lines of code from GDB, strace, and all the various other tools that > > > have to painfully work around the major interface gotchas of ptrace(), > > > while at the same time making their handling of complex processes much > > > more robust. > > > > No. There is absolutely _no_ reason to believe that gdb et al would ever > > delete the ptrace interfaces anyway. > > More to the point, gdb *couldn't* use utrace, because utrace only > exports a kernel API; not a syscall interface.
Yes, this might explain why Kyle wrote: > > > [...] I believe that "utrace" is the kernel side of that > > > API. [...] > And if the Red Hat Toolchain folks are thinking about encouraging > gdb to start creating out-of-tree kernel modules [...] the Red Hat > Toolchain group needs to be smacked upside the head... Those keeping up will note that an ordinary in-tree, non-modular, non-root-only, already-works-with-standard-gdb, potentially-better-than-ptrace debugger interface has already been prototyped & posted on lkml as an RFC. - FChE
