[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:0.022 / U:14.264 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site