On 05/11/2007 05:42 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 10:13:21AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 09:53 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 12:49 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 10:50 +0200, Oliver Falk wrote:
> > > > A question; Before I open BZ... Is the kernel team (I see Dave Jones is
> > > > doin' much; that's why CC:) willing to help AlphaCore and add patches to
> > > > kernel spec?
> > > >
> > > > No, it's nothing for upstream. Just fixes for the spec. Some
> > > > if(n)arch's, sections for alpha, a config, ... Nothing that should break
> > > > primary archs...
> > >
> > > We don't like ifarches. Why?
> >
> > The utrace patch is the biggest concern here, really. Not that it's bad
> > code, but its a significant divergence from upstream, and it doesn't
> > work on sparc32 (and presumably, alpha). Aurora is %ifarch
> > conditionalizing that patch (and one later patch that has to be modified
> > slightly for the old ptrace behavior) in our kernels as well.
>
> Does it apply? Seems there's a config option for it... you could just
> leave that disabled in your .configs.
Problem is (AIUI) that doing that would remove ptrace functionality completely.
With the patch applied, ptrace is implemented as a 'personality' of utrace.
So. If it doesn't work for sparc32 and we cannot simply disable it via
.config, we should stick with ifnarch-ing it for now /me thinks. Maybe
some good kernel-hacker can have a look into it.
Working out a patch, so we can disable utrace by .config and
automatically enabling ptrace would be the best way!?
-of
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
