Re: arch/ && tracehook_report_syscall_xxx()

[Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>]

On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 11:29:19AM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > We have a lot of code like arch/alpha/kernel/ptrace.c:syscall_trace()
> > in arch/ and I can't see how to convert them to use tracehooks.
> > 
> > The first problem, we don't know which hook should be called, there is
> > no entry/exit argument.
> 
> These arch maintainers just need to update their code.  Christoph has
> started poking arch folks individually about getting up to speed.
> 
> IMHO, it is better anyway to use separate entry/exit calls.  For that
> change, it is often easy to see how to do it correctly in the assembly code
> without really knowing the arch at all.  (There are separate assembly paths
> leading to the calls for entry vs exit cases already, just change the
> symbol names.  Adding an argument would require a bit of a clue about
> assembly on the arch.)

I've poked a few arch maintainers in the past to separate the enter/exit
path and usually got the desired changes :)

> > Still, I think it is better to change this code right now, and call
> > ptrace_report_syscall() directly.
> 
> I disagree.  Let the arch code get with the modern style.  
> It is just a minute's hack for the arch maintainer.

Yeah, let's get the architectures up to modern standards first, that
should make life a lot simpler.