linux-kernel - Re: Incorrect order of last two arguments of ptrace for requests PPC_PTRACE

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 30 Apr 2007 15:42:57 +1000
From:	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
To:	Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>
Cc:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Incorrect order of last two arguments of ptrace for requests
	PPC_PTRACE_GETREGS, SETREGS, GETFPREGS, SETFPREGS

Anton Blanchard writes:

> I looked at this a while ago and my decision at the time was to keep the
> old implementation around for a while and create two new ones that match
> the x86 numbering:
> 
> #define PTRACE_GETREGS            12
> #define PTRACE_SETREGS            13
> #define PTRACE_GETFPREGS          14
> #define PTRACE_SETFPREGS          15
> 
> I hate gratuitous differences, each ptrace app ends up with a sea of
> ifdefs.
> 
> Also I think it would be worth changing getregs/setregs to grab the
> entire pt_regs structure. Otherwise most ops (gdb, strace etc) will just
> have to make multiple ptrace calls to get the nia etc.

Did you do a patch to do that?

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