lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jun]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/5] ptrace: implement PTRACE_SEIZE
Date
On Tuesday 14 June 2011 11:20, Tejun Heo wrote:
#define PTRACE_EVENT_FORK 1
#define PTRACE_EVENT_VFORK 2
#define PTRACE_EVENT_CLONE 3
> #define PTRACE_EVENT_EXEC 4
> #define PTRACE_EVENT_VFORK_DONE 5
> #define PTRACE_EVENT_EXIT 6
> +#define PTRACE_EVENT_STOP 7

Er... these constants were corresponding exactly to
bit positions in ptrace options which enable them:

#define PTRACE_O_TRACESYSGOOD 0x00000001
#define PTRACE_O_TRACEFORK 0x00000002
#define PTRACE_O_TRACEVFORK 0x00000004
#define PTRACE_O_TRACECLONE 0x00000008
#define PTRACE_O_TRACEEXEC 0x00000010
#define PTRACE_O_TRACEVFORKDONE 0x00000020
#define PTRACE_O_TRACEEXIT 0x00000040

For example, PTRACE_O_TRACEEXEC is 4th bit, PTRACE_EVENT_EXEC is 4.

If we'd define PTRACE_EVENT_STOP as 7, any future added
PTRACE_O_foo bit with value 0x00000080 will be unable
to follow this convention.

I propose to define PTRACE_EVENT_STOP as 64 instead, leaving 64 low
PTRACE_EVENT_foo constants for possible future PTRACE_O_foo bits.

[32 should be enough too, but I feel paranoid today :)]

--
vda



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-06-18 09:57    [W:0.134 / U:0.116 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site