From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH consolidate sys_ptrace
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 11:37:54 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <10611.1130845074@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051101051221.GA26017@lst.de>
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
> > The sys_ptrace boilerplate code (everything outside the big switch
> > statement for the arch-specific requests) is shared by most
> > architectures. This patch moves it to kernel/ptrace.c and leaves the
> > arch-specific code as arch_ptrace.
Looks okay to me. I do have a concern about all the extra indirections we're
acquiring by this mad rush to centralise everything. It's going to slow things
down and consume more stack space. Is there any way we can:
(1) Make a sys_ptrace() *jump* to arch_ptrace() instead of calling it, thus
obviating the extra return step.
(2) Drop the use of lock_kernel().
Otherwise, the patch looks valid:
Acked-By: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-01 11:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-11-01 5:09 [PATCH consolidate sys_ptrace Christoph Hellwig
2005-11-01 5:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
2005-11-01 9:58 ` Paul Mackerras
2005-11-01 10:30 ` Ralf Baechle
2005-11-01 11:37 ` David Howells [this message]
2005-11-02 4:31 ` Andrew Morton
2005-11-05 0:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2005-11-01 18:12 ` Russell King
2005-11-02 11:21 ` Paul Mundt
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-08-10 16:59 [PATCH] " Luck, Tony
2005-08-11 0:20 ` Stephen Rothwell
2005-08-10 8:00 Christoph Hellwig
2005-08-10 8:33 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2005-08-10 8:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2005-08-10 8:43 ` Andi Kleen
2005-08-10 9:36 ` David Howells
2005-08-10 12:46 ` Paul Mundt
2005-08-10 13:15 ` Ralf Baechle
2005-08-10 13:28 ` Jeff Dike
2005-08-10 17:08 ` Richard Henderson
2005-08-11 10:44 ` Roman Zippel
2005-08-11 13:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2005-08-11 16:51 ` Russell King
2005-08-11 17:32 ` Richard Henderson
2005-08-11 17:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=10611.1130845074@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com \
--to=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox