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  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:	Thu, 21 Jan 2010 17:28:42 -0800 (PST)
From:	Linus Torvalds <>
To:	Andrew Morton <>
cc:	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <>,
	Stephen Rothwell <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>,
	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <>,
	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	Fr??d??ric Weisbecker <>,
	LKML <>,
	Steven Rostedt <>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <>,, "H. Peter Anvin" <>,, Thomas Gleixner <>
Subject: Re: linux-next: add utrace tree

On Thu, 21 Jan 2010, Andrew Morton wrote:
> ptrace is a nasty, complex part of the kernel which has a long history
> of problems, but it's all been pretty quiet in there for the the past few
> years.

More importantly, we're not ever going to get rid of it. 

Quite frankly, judging my all past history we have ever seen in kernel 
interfaces, new an non-portable interfaces simply are never used. The 
whole question whether they are nicer or not is entirely immaterial. 

I'm personally very dubious that there are any merits to utrace that 
outweigh the very clear disadvantages: just another layer that adds a new 
level of abstraction to the only interface that people actually _use_, 
namely ptrace.

But I haven't followed utrace. I doubt _anybody_ has, except for the 
utrace people themselves.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists