Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:41:52 +0100 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | Re: [RFC,PATCH 14/14] utrace core |
| |
On 11/24, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> writes: > > > From: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com> > > > > This adds the utrace facility, a new modular interface in the kernel > > for implementing user thread tracing and debugging. This fits on top > > of the tracehook_* layer, so the new code is well-isolated. > > Could we just drop the tracehook layer if this finally merged > and call the low level functions directly?
Not sure I understand. Tracehooks are trivial inline wrappers on top utrace calls,
> It might have been reasonably early on when it was still out of tree, > but longer term when it's integrated having strange opaque hooks > like that just makes the coder harder to read and maintain.
Well, I don't think the code will be better if we remove tracehooks.
For example. tracehook_report_syscall_entry() has a lot of callers in arch/, each callsite should be changed to do
if ((task_utrace_flags(current) & UTRACE_EVENT(SYSCALL_ENTRY)) && utrace_report_syscall_entry(regs)) ret = -1; // this depends on machine
instead of simply calling tracehook_report_syscall_entry().
What is the point?
But again, perhaps I misunderstood you.
Oleg.
| |