[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110512172133.GN1030@htj.dyndns.org>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 19:21:33 +0200
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: jan.kratochvil@...hat.com, vda.linux@...glemail.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, indan@....nu
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/11] ptrace: implement PTRACE_INTERRUPT
Hello, again.
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 07:06:17PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > I don't agree. PTRACE_TRACEME predates PTRACE_ATTACH and is
> > completely redundant. If you can make the child do PTRACE_TRACEME,
> > you might as well just make it do pause() and PTRACE_SEIZE yourself,
> > so unless there's something PTRACE_SEIZE can't do, I don't think I'll
> > be adding SEIZEME.
>
> Heh. I think that you are very right technically and I thought the
> same. That is why I never mentioned PTRACE_TRACEME before. In fact
> I never understood why PTRACE_TRACEME exists.
>
> However. Perhaps this is wrong from the practical pov. SEIZEME can
> simplify the conversion of the existing code. People are lazy, but
> we need the users of PTRACE_SEIZE.
Hmmm... given that the attaching part is somewhat isolated from the
rest of code. I'm hoping to get away with providing a sample code in
documentation. :-)
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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