[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100123115149.GB7828@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 06:51:49 -0500
From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Kyle Moffett <kyle@...fetthome.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Fr??d??ric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
utrace-devel@...hat.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: add utrace tree
Hi -
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 11:01:21AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> [...]
> What I don't understand is why [libgdb?] doesn't solve 99% of your problem.
> ptrace is not perfect but most of the real ptrace limitations actually
> come about because either the CPU can't do something or because the
> supporting logic would be too expensive - things like having extra
> private debugger pages.
At least one reason is that ptrace is single-usage-only, so for
example you cannot concurrently debug & strace the same program.
OTOH, utrace is designed to permit clean nesting/sharing semantics for
concurrent debugger-type tools operating on the same processes.
- FChE
--
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