[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080429004405.2c375723@bree.surriel.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 00:44:05 -0400
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: benh@...nel.crashing.org, roland@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PTRACE_{READ,WRITE}{TEXT,DATA}
On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 21:34:16 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 13:54:08 +1000
>
> > I noticed kernel/ptrace.c has ptrace_readdata/writedata functions that
> > are only used by sparc and sparc64 which implements the ptrace requests
> > PTRACE_READ_DATA, PTRACE_WRITE_DATA (and _TEXT variants).
> >
> > Any reason not to make everybody benefit from these and moving the sparc
> > implementation to the generic ptrace_request (&compat) ?
> >
> > It's more efficient than read/writing one word at a time... I thought
> > about it in the light of some work Rik is doing to make
> > access_process_vm useable on video ram mappings done by the X server...
>
> It's kind of pointless because what gdb does these days on Linux is
> use the procfs 'mem' file to directly read in parts of the inferior's
> address space.
>
> See linux_proc_xfer_partial() in gdb/linux-nat.c
Strange, changing access_process_vm on Fedora 9 made gdb able to
see video memory that the X server had mmapped.
Are you sure gdb behaves as you suggest?
On x86 my patch seems to work as I expected...
--
All rights reversed.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists