Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754577Ab1FRJEh (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Jun 2011 05:04:37 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:55306 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751526Ab1FRJEg (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Jun 2011 05:04:36 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=g5KuCt+eCASgwjhCCAts/5tUySja9tmG184vqC1zSPGsy1SXIPMyoP39Has0RBsVa5 7bM4VsUXKWch70Seg6wsJk+/7aM7w1Sn7YPh02rIb6P24SrLBP9xIgcEwdfrLnU6g4ry 2KPElCR4WJfQ/vIQb/RswlMk09vd7bvCSLSHo= Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 11:04:31 +0200 From: Tejun Heo To: Denys Vlasenko Cc: oleg@redhat.com, jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, indan@nul.nu, bdonlan@gmail.com, pedro@codesourcery.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] ptrace: implement PTRACE_SEIZE Message-ID: <20110618090431.GL2611@htj.dyndns.org> References: <1308043218-23619-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <201106180959.38847.vda.linux@googlemail.com> <20110618083559.GK2611@htj.dyndns.org> <201106181057.02477.vda.linux@googlemail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201106181057.02477.vda.linux@googlemail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1233 Lines: 29 Hello, On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 10:57:02AM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > I explained this already. strace code is a bit complex, and adding > more complexity so that it uses PTRACE_SEIZE if available, but PTRACE_ATTACH > if it is not, will add some PITA. > > Considering that strace does not want PTRACE_SEIZE per se, it only wants > to have a way to properly see and handle group stops, having an option > to enable *only that functonality* without having to use PTRACE_SEIZE > will be useful for strace. I understand that it would make strace's life somewhat easier but don't agree the difference is significant enough to justify introducing more options. We're talking about small number of well defined behaviors. Yes, it wouldn't be as simple as adding several liners during initialization but that doesn't warrant extra kernel features and differing behaviors which, I think, in the long run, make things much more complicated (not complex) than necessary. Thanks. -- tejun -- 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/