On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 07:49:35PM +0200, Helge Deller wrote: > I agree that my comment suggests that splitting the patch into two parts > could make sense to track the changes easier, but if you look into the > original code you'll see, that I would need to duplicate all of the > arch_ptrace code and then make the copied part 64bit-ready. Then the > second patch would delete all of this again and replacing it with the > generic function calls. > IMHO that's a lot of coding and changes without any need. You'll first > need to understand coding in my first patch which is then deleted > afterwards with the second patch again. And if you look at the final > ptrace.c file after applying my patch which I posted here, you'll see > that arch_ptrace is now really small and simple to understand. > > That said, I'm not very motivated to split my patch. Oh, parisc actually uses sys_ptrace as the 32bit entry point. Yes, I see your point and take back the suggestion. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
