From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from [10.3.1.93] (helo=sc8-sf-list1-new.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1FYraC-0006BB-NT for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:30:00 -0700 Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.92] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FYraC-0007wh-Nm for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:30:00 -0700 Received: from filer.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu ([130.245.126.2]) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.44) id 1FYraB-0004dk-4a for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:30:00 -0700 Subject: Re: [uml-devel] Re: [RFC] PATCH 3/4 - Time virtualization : PTRACE_SYSCALL_MASK From: "Charles P. Wright" In-Reply-To: <20060426194009.GA9845@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> References: <200604131720.k3DHKqdr004720@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> <20060420090514.GA9452@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <444797F8.6020509@fujitsu-siemens.com> <1146083202.10211.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060426194009.GA9845@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1146086993.10851.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 17:29:53 -0400 To: Jeff Dike Cc: Bodo Stroesser , Heiko Carstens , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 15:40 -0400, Jeff Dike wrote: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 04:26:42PM -0400, Charles P. Wright wrote: > > I have a similar local patch that I've been using. I think it would be > > worthwhile to have an extra bit in the bitmap that says what to do with > > calls that fall outside the range [0, __NR_syscall]. That way the > > ptrace monitor can decide whether it is useful to get informed of these > > "bogus" calls. > > The bit needs to be somewhere, but I think sticking it in the syscall > bitmask is a bad idea. Mixing apples and oranges, as it were. > Sticking it in the op is better, even though that's a bit of apples > and oranges as well. > > Another alternative would be to make it an option and set it with > PTRACE_SETOPTIONS. That is probably a better solution than sticking it in the request (I assume you meant request by op). I think spawning more PTRACE_* requests that perform some permutation of PTRACE_SYSCALL is likely to make things confusing. Charles ------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel