lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 6/8] ptrace: arch_ptrace -ENOSYS return
    On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 02:50:01PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
    > On Thu, 20 Mar 2008, Roland McGrath wrote:
    > > > Wouldn't it be nicer to just let "arch_ptrace()" return a flag saying
    > > > whether it handled things or not?
    > >
    > > It would certainly be nicer. I would prefer:
    > >
    > > extern int arch_ptrace(struct task_struct *child, long request,
    > > long addr, long data, long *retval);
    > >
    > > where it returns an error code or it returns 0 and *retval is the value
    > > or it returns 1 and it didn't do anything.
    > >
    > > So this ugliness seemed like a better bet than waiting for 20 more
    > > arch sign-offs before any of it could go in. You are certainly in a
    > > position to just change the generic signature and make every arch do
    > > the update (or fix your typos if you just tweak them all blind), and
    > > let them grumble. I did not presume to do so.
    >
    > What about adding a CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_PTRACE2, which is set by the archs
    > which are converted. For those which are not you add a fallback
    > implementation:

    HAVE_PTRACE2 or at least following the HAVE_* semnatic.
    And then do:

    config HAVE_PTRACE2
    def_bool n

    In some common file.
    Then arch files can do:
    config X86
    ...
    + select HAVE_PTRACE2

    Sam


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-03-21 15:13    [W:0.026 / U:0.280 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site