Re: PTRACE_SYSEMU numbering

[Laurent Vivier <LaurentVivier@wanadoo.fr>]

Hi,

there is no problem for me.
Paolo, as you are the submitter of the patch to the list and the real  
maintainer, what do you think about that ?

Regards,
Laurent

Le 21 sept. 05 à 19:25, Daniel Jacobowitz a écrit :

> Here's a bit of the PTRACE_SYSEMU patch, committed three weeks ago:
>
> --- a/include/linux/ptrace.h
> +++ b/include/linux/ptrace.h
> @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
>  #define PTRACE_DETACH 0x11
>  #define PTRACE_SYSCALL 24
> +#define PTRACE_SYSEMU 31
>
>  /* 0x4200-0x4300 are reserved for architecture-independent  
> additions. */
>  #define PTRACE_SETOPTIONS 0x4200
>
> OK, I admit I could have made the comment clearer.  But can we fix  
> this?
> You've added PTRACE_SYSEMU on top of PTRACE_GETFDPIC, which  
> presumably will
> mess up either debugging or UML on that architecture (if the latter  
> were
> ported).  That's exactly the problem we defined the 0x4200-0x4300  
> range
> to prevent.
>
> --
> Daniel Jacobowitz
> CodeSourcery, LLC

Laurent Vivier
LaurentVivier@wanadoo.fr



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/