lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Nov]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC,PATCH 14/14] utrace core
    Hi -

    On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 10:26:19PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
    > [...]
    > > 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().
    >
    > That should be in the utrace code?
    >
    > I don't have a problem with having common code somewhere,
    > just not a whole layer whose only purpose seems to be obfuscation.

    One man's obfuscation is another man's abstraction.
    Would you be satisfied if "tracehook_" was renamed "utracehook_"?


    - FChE


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-11-24 22:33    [W:0.039 / U:29.292 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site