From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Petr Tesarik Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 07:53:06 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] ptrace RSE bug Message-Id: <473AA962.6090701@suse.cz> List-Id: References: <1188357710.22637.7.camel@sli10-conroe.sh.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <1188357710.22637.7.camel@sli10-conroe.sh.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org Roland McGrath wrote: > What's arch_ptrace_resume about? > I thought we were agreed on the plan using TIF_RESTORE_RSE. No, after further discussion we came to the conclusion that introducing the bit actually saves us only a couple of user-to-kernel/kernel-to-user copies in do_exit(), but it complicates the kernel exit path, so it's not really worth it. Shaohua didn't call it arch_ptrace_resume(), but he added an argument to arch_ptrace_stop(). I was already testing a different variant of that patch and I'm sorry if it caused confusion. :( Is there any other advantage in introducing TIF_RESTORE_RSE than saving some unneeded data copying? Regards, Petr Tesarik > Thanks, > Roland