linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 3/X] ptrace: introduce the empty "struct 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 26 May 2009 13:33:08 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/X] ptrace: introduce the empty "struct
	ptrace_task"

> Please use 'struct ptrace_context' and '*ptrace_ctx' instead.

I am fine with this name (or any other).  But note in considering your
suggestions that we will shortly have another separate struct with a
similar name.  The first one is the state of a ptrace tracee task (bits
about itself and pointing to its tracer).  The second is the state of a
ptrace tracer (head of its tracees list, locks, etc).

A name like "ptrace_context" could be read as intuitive for either of these
two quite different things.  Perhaps this is true of "ptrace_task" too,
though it seemed to us like it wasn't too unclear, and preferably shorter
than something like "ptrace_tracee_context".

Thanks,
Roland
--
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/