Re: Compat 32-bit syscall entry from 64-bit task!?

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 01/26, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 25 January 2012 20:36, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > We can add the new events,
> >
> > 	PTRACE_EVENT_SYSCALL_ENTRY
> > 	PTRACE_EVENT_SYSCALL_COMPAT_ENTRY
> > 	PTRACE_EVENT_SYSCALL_EXIT
> > 	PTRACE_EVENT_SYSCALL_COMPAT_EXIT
>
> We can get away with just the first one.
> (1) It's unlikely people would want to get native sysentry events but not compat ones,
> thus first two options can be combined into one;

Confused... Sure, we need the single option, or we could even report
this unconditionally if PT_SEIZED.

I meant the different PTRACE_EVENT_* codes only.

> (2) syscall exit compat-ness is known from entry type - no need to indicate it; and
> (3) if we would flag syscall entry with an event value in wait status, then syscall
> exit will be already distinquisable.

Well, if we add _ENTRY then it looks more consistent to report _EXIT
as well even if it is not that useful.

Doesn't matter. Nobody seem to like this, and afaics Linus has the
good arguments against the arch-independent "consolidation".

Oleg.

--
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/