Skip to contentSkip to conversation

x86, ptrace: remove bad comment

PATCH Applied Markus Metzger 2 participants 3 messages Dec 14, 2007 – Dec 17, 2007 x86

lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/5 x86, ptrace: remove bad comment

Remove no longer correct comment.

---

arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c +0 -4
Index: linux-2.6-x86/arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c
===================================================================
@@ -597,10 +597,6 @@
 		memset(tss->io_bitmap, 0xff, prev->io_bitmap_max);
 	}
 
-	/*
-	 * Last branch recording recofiguration of trace hardware and
-	 * disentangling of trace data per task.
-	 */
 	if (test_tsk_thread_flag(prev_p, TIF_BTS_TRACE_TS))
 		ptrace_bts_take_timestamp(prev_p, BTS_TASK_DEPARTS);
 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel GmbH
Dornacher Strasse 1
85622 Feldkirchen/Muenchen Germany
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Feldkirchen bei Muenchen
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Douglas Lusk, Peter Gleissner, Hannes Schwaderer
Registergericht: Muenchen HRB 47456 Ust.-IdNr.
VAT Registration No.: DE129385895
Citibank Frankfurt (BLZ 502 109 00) 600119052

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

Applied
#1 lore raw

Markus,

i've applied the first 4 patches to x86.git.

another detail: shouldnt this be structured so that the APIs are introduced in kernel/ptrace.c, and that the architecture offers the mechanism. (which would thus be ptrace-independent) This would also open these APIs up to kernel-internal use and to be used by other architectures.

Ingo

#2 lore raw
Quoted 10 lines

-----Original Message-----
From: Ingo Molnar [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Samstag, 15. Dezember 2007 08:30

another detail: shouldnt this be structured so that the APIs are introduced in kernel/ptrace.c, and that the architecture offers the mechanism. (which would thus be ptrace-independent) This would also open
these APIs up to kernel-internal use and to be used by other architectures.

Isn't this best done once we actually have at least one other architecture?

The DS interface should be fine for kernel and user trace on x86, but it may not be the best interface for other architectures.

regards,
markus.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel GmbH
Dornacher Strasse 1
85622 Feldkirchen/Muenchen Germany
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Feldkirchen bei Muenchen
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Douglas Lusk, Peter Gleissner, Hannes Schwaderer
Registergericht: Muenchen HRB 47456 Ust.-IdNr.
VAT Registration No.: DE129385895
Citibank Frankfurt (BLZ 502 109 00) 600119052

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.