Re: [uml-devel] Re: [RFC] PATCH 3/4 - Time virtualization : PTRACE_SYSCALL_MASK

[Jeff Dike]

On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 04:26:42PM -0400, Charles P. Wright wrote:
> I have a similar local patch that I've been using.  I think it would be
> worthwhile to have an extra bit in the bitmap that says what to do with
> calls that fall outside the range [0, __NR_syscall].  That way the
> ptrace monitor can decide whether it is useful to get informed of these
> "bogus" calls.

The bit needs to be somewhere, but I think sticking it in the syscall
bitmask is a bad idea.  Mixing apples and oranges, as it were.
Sticking it in the op is better, even though that's a bit of apples
and oranges as well.

Another alternative would be to make it an option and set it with
PTRACE_SETOPTIONS.

				Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/