On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 02:35:45PM +0800, liqin.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> +long
> +arch_ptrace(struct task_struct *child, long request, long addr, long
> data)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (request == PTRACE_TRACEME) {
> + /* are we already being traced? */
> + if (current->ptrace & PT_PTRACED)
> + return -EPERM;
> +
> + /* set the ptrace bit in the process flags. */
> + current->ptrace |= PT_PTRACED;
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + ret = -ESRCH;
> + if (!child)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = -EPERM;
> +
> + if (request == PTRACE_ATTACH) {
> + ret = ptrace_attach(child);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + ret = ptrace_check_attach(child, request == PTRACE_KILL);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> +
All this stuff has been done by generic ptrace code for a long time
and is not needed at all.
> + switch (request) {
> + case PTRACE_PEEKTEXT: /* read word at location addr. */
> + case PTRACE_PEEKDATA: {
> + unsigned long tmp;
> + int copied;
> +
> + copied = access_process_vm(child, addr, &tmp, sizeof(tmp),
> 0);
> + ret = -EIO;
> + if (copied != sizeof(tmp))
> + break;
> +
> + ret = put_user(tmp, (unsigned long *) data);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
This also has a generic implementation. Please take a look at a modern
ptrace implementation like sh, powerpc or x86 to model yours after.
--
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
