[lkml]   [2004]   [Dec]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: ptrace single-stepping change breaks Wine
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004, Andi Kleen wrote:

> > - you couldn't even debug signal handlers, because they were _really_
> > hard to get into unless you knew where they were and put a breakpoint
> > on them.
> Ok I see this as being a problem. But I bet it could be fixed
> much simpler without doing all this complicated and likely-to-be-buggy
> popf parsing you added.

I don't think that the Wine problem resolution is due to the POPF
instruction handling. Basically Linus patch does a nice cleanup plus POPF
handling, so maybe the patch can be split.

> > - you couldn't see the instruction after a system call.
> Are you sure?

Yes, this was true with 2.4. Than it has been fixed some time ago. But
handling that revealed a fragile handling of ptrace event delivery we had
in do_syscall_trace(). Part of the Linus patch tries to solve the fact
that on one side strace wants things to happen in a certain way, way that
seem to break Wine. I think Linus cleanup of the ptrace event delivery can
get strace, Wine and single-step-after-syscall right, w/out POPF handling.
Then you guys can flame each other over the POPF handling ;)

- Davide

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:09    [W:0.225 / U:5.416 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site