Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262272AbTIZOT1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:19:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262273AbTIZOT1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:19:27 -0400 Received: from mx1.elte.hu ([157.181.1.137]:8673 "EHLO mx1.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262272AbTIZOTO (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:19:14 -0400 Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:19:45 +0200 (CEST) From: Ingo Molnar Reply-To: Ingo Molnar To: Maciej Zenczykowski Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Syscall security In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 26 Sep 2003, Maciej Zenczykowski wrote: > Unfortunately sometimes the data transfer through stdio can be counted > in hundreds of MB (or even in extreme cases a couple of GB), plus it is > important to not slow down the execution of the code (we're timing and > comparing execution speed of different approaches). Would doing this > via ptrace increase the runtime of the parent pid or of the child pid or > both? ie. would this make any syscall costly timewise (stdio is either > from a ram disk or piped to/from a generating/checking process) or would > this be unnoticeable? you can measure this effect by doing "strace -o /dev/null " of such a program. (strace will have higher overhead than a simple syscall filtering ptrace app, but it should show you the kind of effects ptrace causes.) Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/