On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 04:43:41 +0100 Blaisorblade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I sent an equivalent patch in earlier today:
> Doh! Interesting this timing...
>
> > Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86_64/ia32/ptrace32.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86_64/ia32/ptrace32.c
> > +++ linux-2.6/arch/x86_64/ia32/ptrace32.c
> > @@ -239,6 +239,8 @@ asmlinkage long sys32_ptrace(long reques
> > __u32 val;
> >
> > switch (request) {
> > + case PTRACE_OLDSETOPTIONS:
> > + request = PTRACE_SETOPTIONS;
> > case PTRACE_TRACEME:
> > case PTRACE_ATTACH:
> > case PTRACE_KILL:
> >
> > I change the request so that PTRACE_OLDSETOPTIONS doesn't need to
> > propogate any further. However, it is present in include/asm-x86_64,
> > so I guess that counts as being part of the x86_64 ABI. That being
> > the case, I guess my patch can be dropped in favor of this one.
>
> It is handled in ptrace_request, unless there are include problems. I'm going
> to reboot and test mine for any remaining problem.
Whatever happens, please ensure that the final fix makes it into -stable
as well. Jeff's version of this patch wasn't cc'ed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
