So I think this series is fine, yesterday I misread it completely. On 06/20, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > Suppose a 64-bit task A traces a 32-bit task B.
And even if they are both 64-bit ... > B makes a syscall > that uses ERESTART_RESTARTBLOCK and gets a signal. A catches > syscall exit, snapshots B's regs, changes the regs, and resumes. > Then A restores the snapshot of B's regs. perhaps in this case gdb should always turn ERESTART_RESTARTBLOCK into EINTR, because we can't know if B->restart_block is still the same; it can be changed if the tracee does another RESTARTBLOCK syscall after the first resume. But anyway the patch looks good to me. Oleg.
