Re: [PATCH 1/4] ptrace: temporary revert the recent ptrace/jobctl rework

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 06/21, Roland McGrath wrote:
>
> > OK, so here's my (hacky) idea:
> > (1) Forget ptrace-via-utrace.  Have utrace be a separate thing.  This
> > way the recent ptrace changes won't matter.

This is what V2 does.

> > (2) But, what about ptrace co-existing well with utrace?  Make them
> > mutually exclusive - a ptraced-process can't be utraced and a
> > utraced-process can't be ptraced.
>
> We had this situation before for a while.  It has the substantial downside
> that e.g. you cannot do any system-wide systemtap tracing without making
> all strace and gdb use impossible.

Yes, we can't make them mutually exclusive, this can't work. So V2 tries
to teach them play well together.

> > Assuming the above is a semi-reasonable idea, it might be a lot less
> > work than updating the ptrace-via-utrace code to handle the new ptrace
> > changes.
>
> That's for Oleg to say.  (Sorry, Oleg. ;-)

Oh, I am not sure what is simpler ;)

Oleg.

_______________________________________________
kernel mailing list
kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel


[Index of Archives]     [Fedora General Discussion]     [Older Fedora Users Archive]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Coolkey]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [USB]     [Asterisk PBX]

  Powered by Linux