Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:44:38 +0100 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | Re: Compat 32-bit syscall entry from 64-bit task!? |
| |
On 01/26, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > > On Wednesday 25 January 2012 20:36, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > We can add the new events, > > > > PTRACE_EVENT_SYSCALL_ENTRY > > PTRACE_EVENT_SYSCALL_COMPAT_ENTRY > > PTRACE_EVENT_SYSCALL_EXIT > > PTRACE_EVENT_SYSCALL_COMPAT_EXIT > > We can get away with just the first one. > (1) It's unlikely people would want to get native sysentry events but not compat ones, > thus first two options can be combined into one;
Confused... Sure, we need the single option, or we could even report this unconditionally if PT_SEIZED.
I meant the different PTRACE_EVENT_* codes only.
> (2) syscall exit compat-ness is known from entry type - no need to indicate it; and > (3) if we would flag syscall entry with an event value in wait status, then syscall > exit will be already distinquisable.
Well, if we add _ENTRY then it looks more consistent to report _EXIT as well even if it is not that useful.
Doesn't matter. Nobody seem to like this, and afaics Linus has the good arguments against the arch-independent "consolidation".
Oleg.
| |