From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750982AbWGMNWe (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jul 2006 09:22:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751472AbWGMNWe (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jul 2006 09:22:34 -0400 Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:52973 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750982AbWGMNWe (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jul 2006 09:22:34 -0400 From: Andi Kleen To: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: utrace vs. ptrace Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 15:21:52 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.3 Cc: Albert Cahalan , torvalds@osdl.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, arjan@infradead.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Roland McGrath References: <787b0d920607122243g24f5a003p1f004c9a1779f75c@mail.gmail.com> <200607131437.28727.ak@suse.de> <20060713124316.GA18852@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20060713124316.GA18852@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200607131521.52505.ak@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > I'm not sure that's particularly useful (I think I would prefer to > > keep it in kernel), [...] > > why would we want to keep this in the kernel? Coredumping in the kernel > is fragile, and it's nowhere near performance-critical to really live > within the kernel. Mostly because I fear it would become another udev like disaster, requiring user space updates regularly, and core dumps are a fairly critical debugging feature that I wouldn't like to become unreliable. That said extended core dumping (e.g. automatic processing of the output) in user space makes sense. I had a prototype for that once that uploaded a simple crash report to a web page. -Andi