On Thu, 20 Mar 2008, Roland McGrath wrote: > > Wouldn't it be nicer to just let "arch_ptrace()" return a flag saying > > whether it handled things or not? > > It would certainly be nicer. I would prefer: > > extern int arch_ptrace(struct task_struct *child, long request, > long addr, long data, long *retval); > > where it returns an error code or it returns 0 and *retval is the value > or it returns 1 and it didn't do anything. > > So this ugliness seemed like a better bet than waiting for 20 more > arch sign-offs before any of it could go in. You are certainly in a > position to just change the generic signature and make every arch do > the update (or fix your typos if you just tweak them all blind), and > let them grumble. I did not presume to do so. What about adding a CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_PTRACE2, which is set by the archs which are converted. For those which are not you add a fallback implementation: #ifndef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_PTRACE2 static int arch_ptrace2(whatever your favourite interface) { ret = arch_ptrace(); return do_ugly_fixups(ret); } #endif That way you introduce the new interface and convert one or two archs initialy without breaking the other 22. At the same time you mark arch_ptrace() deprecated so it will get the attention of the arch maintainers pretty fast. Once all archs are converted we can remove the config flag and the fallback quirk. Thanks, tglx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html