On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 13:57, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> While in theory user_enable_single_step/user_disable_single_step/
> user_enable_blockstep could also be provided as an inline or macro there's no
> good reason to do so, and having the prototype in one places keeps code size
> and confusion down.
the only annoying thing here is that we currently have to enable both
user_disable_single_step() and ptrace_disable() that do exactly the
same thing. i avoided this somewhat on Blackfin by cheating:
#define user_disable_single_step(child) ptrace_disable(child)
so now there's no code bloat. perhaps this could be moved into common
linux/ptrace.h too ?
> --- linux-2.6/include/linux/ptrace.h
> +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/ptrace.h
> @@ -238,6 +238,9 @@
> static inline void user_disable_single_step(struct task_struct *task)
> {
> }
> +#else
> +extern void user_enable_single_step(struct task_struct *);
> +extern void user_disable_single_step(struct task_struct *);
> #endif /* arch_has_single_step */
+#define ptrace_disable(child) user_disable_single_step(child)
-mike
--
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
