From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.91] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1ECg8N-0003HD-LJ for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 06 Sep 2005 09:17:19 -0700 Received: from lakshmi.addtoit.com ([198.99.130.6] helo=lakshmi.solana.com) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1ECg8L-0007Oz-6k for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 06 Sep 2005 09:17:19 -0700 From: Jeff Dike Subject: Re: [uml-devel] SYSEMU getting merged - but I'm in doubt Message-ID: <20050906161032.GA6157@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> References: <200509041702.18506.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200509041702.18506.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> Sender: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: The user-mode Linux development list List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 12:10:32 -0400 To: Blaisorblade Cc: user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Charles P. Wright" , Bodo Stroesser On Sun, Sep 04, 2005 at 05:02:18PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote: > Now, the point is: should I ask Linus to drop it for now, clean the > interface, and resend the cleaned up one, with different ptrace call codes? I would be tempted to leave it in and fix it before 2.6.14. We need different ptrace codes so that UML knows how to switch interception types, I take it? UML is the only user, so there aren't really any compatibility issues. > On the host side, instead, supporting both the broken API and the new one is > more difficult. Yeah, and it shouldn't be done. This is one reason I'd like to use the same ptrace codes - it doesn't leave a hole in the codes that says there was a broken ABI there once. > What's your opinion on this? The options are: > 1) merge it as-is > 2) take it back for now, fix it and merge it for 2.6.15. Merge as-is, fix it before 2.6.13, and you get the same thing, except a release earlier. I think this shouldn't be a problem, as after the floodgates close, you still get to fix things you merged early. This came about as a result of feedback received because after it went into -mm, and it seems to me that this is a legitimate change for 2.6.14. > And then > > 2a) drop the trick, and avoid changing ptrace call numbers. Old UMLs > will run fast, but crash with /proc/sysemu (only root-accessible). We should drop /proc/sysemu, if it's there at all, since it's only for debugging sysemu, and maintain it as a private patch. So this doesn't seem like much of an issue. Jeff ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel