Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756151Ab0AVS3z (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jan 2010 13:29:55 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756113Ab0AVS3y (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jan 2010 13:29:54 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:17493 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756107Ab0AVS3x (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jan 2010 13:29:53 -0500 Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:28:27 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Andrew Morton , Stephen Rothwell , Peter Zijlstra , Peter Zijlstra , Fr??d??ric Weisbecker , LKML , Steven Rostedt , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , "Frank Ch. Eigler" , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" , utrace-devel@redhat.com, Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: linux-next: add utrace tree Message-ID: <20100122182827.GA13185@redhat.com> References: <20100120061551.GB6588@in.ibm.com> <20100120062834.GB12165@elte.hu> <20100120072925.GA11395@elte.hu> <20100121013822.28781960.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20100122111747.3c224dfd.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20100121163004.8779bd69.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20100121163145.7e958c3f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20100122005147.GD22003@redhat.com> <20100121170541.7425ff10.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1365 Lines: 35 On 01/21, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Jan 2010, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > ptrace is a nasty, complex part of the kernel which has a long history > > of problems, but it's all been pretty quiet in there for the the past few > > years. > > More importantly, we're not ever going to get rid of it. Unfortunately, you are right. The current ptrace (as it is visible from user-space) should stay forever. > Quite frankly, judging my all past history we have ever seen in kernel > interfaces, new an non-portable interfaces simply are never used. The > whole question whether they are nicer or not is entirely immaterial. I have to admit this point looks very reasonable to me. Except, can't resist, ptrace itself is hardly portable. > I'm personally very dubious that there are any merits to utrace that > outweigh the very clear disadvantages: just another layer that adds a new > level of abstraction to the only interface that people actually _use_, > namely ptrace. Of course they can't use other interfaces, we don't have them. And without the new abstraction layer we will never have, I think. Oleg. -- 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/