[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161205163422.GG14429@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 16:34:23 +0000
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Yury Norov <ynorov@...iumnetworks.com>
Cc: arnd@...db.de, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, szabolcs.nagy@....com,
heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, cmetcalf@...hip.com,
philipp.tomsich@...obroma-systems.com, joseph@...esourcery.com,
zhouchengming1@...wei.com, Prasun.Kapoor@...iumnetworks.com,
agraf@...e.de, geert@...ux-m68k.org, kilobyte@...band.pl,
manuel.montezelo@...il.com, pinskia@...il.com,
linyongting@...wei.com, klimov.linux@...il.com, broonie@...nel.org,
bamvor.zhangjian@...wei.com,
Bamvor Zhang Jian <bamvor.zhangjian@...aro.org>,
maxim.kuvyrkov@...aro.org, Nathan_Lynch@...tor.com,
schwidefsky@...ibm.com, davem@...emloft.net,
christoph.muellner@...obroma-systems.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/18] arm64: ptrace: handle ptrace_request differently
for aarch32 and ilp32
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:33:15PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
> New aarch32 ptrace syscall handler is introduced to avoid run-time
> detection of the task type.
What's wrong with the run-time detection? If it's just to avoid a
negligible overhead, I would rather keep the code simpler by avoiding
duplicating the generic compat_sys_ptrace().
--
Catalin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists