Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:50:54 +0400 | From | Alexey Dobriyan <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] utrace |
| |
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 02:34:02AM +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 03:01:02PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote: > > utrace is a new kernel-side API for kernel modules, intended to make it > > tractable to work on novel ways to trace and debug user-mode tasks. > > Finally! Familiar code! :^) > > > A previous utrace prototype was in all Fedora kernels since Fedora Core 6. > > Some substantial implementation and API details in the current code are > > different from those past versions. > > And some internal details still horrible and overdesigned just like at > the very beginning. > > > Please look freshly at these patches. > > Well, all comments on tracehook patches were ignored. > > > This code cannot be enabled without CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_TRACEHOOK and the arch > > details it indicates. In Linus's tree as of v2.6.27-rc4, only powerpc and > > sparc64 have that support. The x86 support is available by merging in the > > tip/x86/tracehook branch. For working on other arch support, there are some > > more details at http://sourceware.org/systemtap/wiki/utrace/arch/HowTo and > > these are mentioned in the comments in arch/Kconfig too (in v2.6.27-rc4). > > > > The first patch adds the utrace kernel API (if CONFIG_UTRACE=y is set). > > There is no change at all without the config option, and with it there is > > no effect on anything at all until a kernel module using the utrace API is > > loaded. There is detailed documentation on the API in DocBook form. > > > > The second patch adds the CONFIG_UTRACE_PTRACE option. > > If config option for ptrace is fine, please name it CONFIG_PTRACE. > For one, there will be no second tracing infrastracture. For two, nobody > but one man on the planet really cares how ptrace(2) is implemented.
Oh, I totally misread what this potion is about.
Of course, it shouldn't exist at all.
| |