From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Schwab Subject: Re: m68k ptrace code Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2009 23:12:32 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20090427191230.GA1657@lst.de> <20090427191441.GC1657@lst.de> <20090510231826.930C5FC35D@magilla.sf.frob.com> <20090805152749.GE6476@lst.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-out.m-online.net ([212.18.0.9]:46855 "EHLO mail-out.m-online.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751896AbZHEVMf (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Aug 2009 17:12:35 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090805152749.GE6476@lst.de> (Christoph Hellwig's message of "Wed, 5 Aug 2009 17:27:49 +0200") Sender: linux-m68k-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Roland McGrath , linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org Christoph Hellwig writes: > Hi Andreas, > > On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 11:32:05AM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: >> > Looks good to me, except you also want to nix PTRACE_KILL from your switch >> > so the generic code handles it. Same goes for {PEEK,POKE}{DATA,TEXT} too. >> > Also note that you have to define a PTRACE_SINGLEBLOCK value in >> > asm/ptrace.h (new request code in your ptrace syscall ABI) to make >> > user_enable_block_step() get used by anything. >> >> Thanks for your comments. I have made these changes and verified with >> the ptrace testsuite that the singleblock request works correctly. >> There are a few failures in the testsuite, which I haven't analyzed yet, >> but none are regressions. > > Any reason why this has never been commited? Looks like Geert has a big backlog. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different."