On 06/21, Roland McGrath wrote: > > > OK, so here's my (hacky) idea: > > (1) Forget ptrace-via-utrace. Have utrace be a separate thing. This > > way the recent ptrace changes won't matter.
This is what V2 does. > > (2) But, what about ptrace co-existing well with utrace? Make them > > mutually exclusive - a ptraced-process can't be utraced and a > > utraced-process can't be ptraced. > > We had this situation before for a while. It has the substantial downside > that e.g. you cannot do any system-wide systemtap tracing without making > all strace and gdb use impossible. Yes, we can't make them mutually exclusive, this can't work. So V2 tries to teach them play well together. > > Assuming the above is a semi-reasonable idea, it might be a lot less > > work than updating the ptrace-via-utrace code to handle the new ptrace > > changes. > > That's for Oleg to say. (Sorry, Oleg. ;-) Oh, I am not sure what is simpler ;) Oleg.
