On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 11:06:59AM +0000, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > On 11/12/2014 08:00 PM, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 10:46:01AM +0000, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > >> On 11/07/2014 11:04 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > >>> To me the fact that PTRACE_SET_SYSCALL can be undefined and > >>> syscall_set_nr() > >>> is very much arch-dependant (but most probably trivial) means that this > >>> code > >>> should live in arch_ptrace(). > >> > >> Thinking of Oleg's comment above, it doesn't make sense neither to define > >> generic > >> NT_SYSTEM_CALL (user_regset) in uapi/linux/elf.h and implement it in > >> ptrace_regset() > >> in kernel/ptrace.c with arch-defined syscall_(g)set_nr(). > >> > >> Since we should have the same interface on arm and arm64, we'd better > >> implement > >> ptrace(PTRACE_SET_SYSCALL) locally on arm64 for now (as I originally > >> submitted). > > > > I think the regset approach is cleaner. We already do something similar for > > TLS. That would be implemented under arch/arm64/ with it's own NT type. > > Okey, so arm64 goes its own way :) > Or do you want to have a similar regset on arm, too? > (In this case, NT_ARM_SYSTEM_CALL can be shared in uapi/linux/elf.h)
Just do arm64. We already have the dedicated request for arch/arm/. Will -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
