Re: [PATCH 6/8] ptrace: arch_ptrace -ENOSYS return

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 07:40:25PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> And I have to say, I really hate that
> 
> 		ret = arch_ptrace(child, request, addr, data);
> 		if (ret == -ENOSYS && !forced_successful_syscall_return())
> 			ret = ptrace_request(child, request, addr, data);
> 
> thing. Instead of doing it that ugly way (return value and a special 
> per-arch forced_successful_syscall_return() thing), this really smells 
> like you just want to change the calling conventions for "arch_ptrace()" 
> instead.
> 
> Wouldn't it be nicer to just let "arch_ptrace()" return a flag saying 
> whether it handled things or not?

I think the easiest and cleanest would be to just drop this whole
series.  There's no inherent advantage of

	ret = -ENOSYS;

in the arch_ptrace default case over

	ret = ptrace_request(...);

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/