From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Helge Deller Subject: Re: [PATCH] compat_sys_ptrace conversions for parisc Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 19:49:35 +0200 Message-ID: <48B2F0AF.3020005@gmx.de> References: <200808242026.06295.deller@gmx.de> <200808242033.25481.deller@gmx.de> <20080825171103.GB28485@phobos.i.cabal.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed To: Kyle McMartin , linux-parisc , Christoph Hellwig Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080825171103.GB28485@phobos.i.cabal.ca> List-ID: List-Id: linux-parisc.vger.kernel.org Hi Kyle, Hi Christoph, Kyle McMartin wrote: > On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 08:33:25PM +0200, Helge Deller wrote: >> This patch does the compat_sys_ptrace conversion for parisc. >> In addition it does convert the parisc ptrace code to use the >> architecture-independent ptrace infrastructure instead of own coding. Both of you said someting like this: > This sounds like it should be two seperate patches, for at least the > reason of making bisecting easier should there be a problem. I agree that my comment suggests that splitting the patch into two parts could make sense to track the changes easier, but if you look into the original code you'll see, that I would need to duplicate all of the arch_ptrace code and then make the copied part 64bit-ready. Then the second patch would delete all of this again and replacing it with the generic function calls. IMHO that's a lot of coding and changes without any need. You'll first need to understand coding in my first patch which is then deleted afterwards with the second patch again. And if you look at the final ptrace.c file after applying my patch which I posted here, you'll see that arch_ptrace is now really small and simple to understand. That said, I'm not very motivated to split my patch. Helge