On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:38:53 +0100 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Change tracehook_report_syscall_exit() to look at step flag and send > the trap signal if needed. > > This change affects ia64, microblaze, parisc, powerpc, sh. They pass > nonzero "step" argument to tracehook but since it was ignored the tracee > reports via ptrace_notify(), this is not right and not consistent. This patch conflicts with utrace-core.patch a bit: *************** *** 134,139 **** */ static inline void tracehook_report_syscall_exit(struct pt_regs *regs, int step) { ptrace_report_syscall(regs); } --- 140,147 ---- */ static inline void tracehook_report_syscall_exit(struct pt_regs *regs, int step) { + if (task_utrace_flags(current) & UTRACE_EVENT(SYSCALL_EXIT)) + utrace_report_syscall_exit(regs); ptrace_report_syscall(regs); } I did this: static inline void tracehook_report_syscall_exit(struct pt_regs *regs, int step) { if (step) { siginfo_t info; user_single_step_siginfo(current, regs, &info); force_sig_info(SIGTRAP, &info, current); return; } + if (task_utrace_flags(current) & UTRACE_EVENT(SYSCALL_EXIT)) + utrace_report_syscall_exit(regs); ptrace_report_syscall(regs); } utrace-core.patch is getting rather old. What is its status? -- 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