lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jul]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: utrace vs. ptrace

    * Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> wrote:

    > On Thursday 13 July 2006 11:24, Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
    > > > utrace enables something like 'transparent live debugging': an app
    > > > crashes in your distro, a window pops up, and you can 'hand over' a
    > > > debugging session to a developer you trust. Or you can instruct the
    > > > system to generate a coredump. Or you can generate a shorter summary
    > > > of the crash, sent to a central site.
    > >
    > > not to mention that utrace could be used to move most of the ELF
    > > coredumping code out of the kernel. (the moment you have access to all
    > > crashed threads userspace can construct its own coredump - instead of
    > > having the kernel construct a coredump file) Roland's patch does not go
    > > as far yet, but it could be a possible target.
    >
    > I'm not sure that's particularly useful (I think I would prefer to
    > keep it in kernel), [...]

    why would we want to keep this in the kernel? Coredumping in the kernel
    is fragile, and it's nowhere near performance-critical to really live
    within the kernel.

    Ingo
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2006-07-13 14:53    [W:0.030 / U:0.040 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site