Re: [PATCH] 2-ptrace_multi

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 05:05:44PM +0200, Renzo Davoli wrote:
> Then it would be inconsistent with ppc64 where it does exist, and ppc64
> has the very same problem.
> So the solution would be to patch also the ppc64 [GS]ETREGS breaking
> compatibility with existing applications. 

Or use new ptrace operations for the full regsets; that is probably
wiser.

> The MULTI proposal was a way to have a fast, simple, safe support.
> Fast: one syscall does all

You've added copy_from_user to several operations which were previously
entirely register-based calling conventions.  In at least some
configurations this will dwarf the cost of the system call trap.

> If you do not find this proposal interesting, I'll continue to support
> it as a specific patch for umview. I am not here to "sell" any solution.
> On the contrary I think it might be useful in many applications.

Well, I'm afraid that I don't find it interesting; and I don't think
GDB would make use of it.

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

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux