Re: [PATCH 6/8] ptrace: arch_ptrace -ENOSYS return

From: Thomas Gleixner <>
Date: 2008-03-22 00:50:01
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Wouldn't it be nicer to just let "arch_ptrace()" return a flag saying 
> > whether it handled things or not?
> It would certainly be nicer.  I would prefer:
> extern int arch_ptrace(struct task_struct *child, long request,
>        	    	       long addr, long data, long *retval);
> where it returns an error code or it returns 0 and *retval is the value
> or it returns 1 and it didn't do anything.
> So this ugliness seemed like a better bet than waiting for 20 more
> arch sign-offs before any of it could go in.  You are certainly in a
> position to just change the generic signature and make every arch do
> the update (or fix your typos if you just tweak them all blind), and
> let them grumble.  I did not presume to do so.

What about adding a CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_PTRACE2, which is set by the archs
which are converted. For those which are not you add a fallback

static int arch_ptrace2(whatever your favourite interface)
	ret = arch_ptrace();
	return do_ugly_fixups(ret);

That way you introduce the new interface and convert one or two archs
initialy without breaking the other 22.

At the same time you mark arch_ptrace() deprecated so it will get the
attention of the arch maintainers pretty fast. Once all archs are
converted we can remove the config flag and the fallback quirk.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Received on Sat Mar 22 00:52:26 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2008-03-22 00:52:45 EST