Re: [RFC,PATCH 14/14] utrace core

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

Hi -

On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 10:26:19PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> [...]
> > For example. tracehook_report_syscall_entry() has a lot of callers
> > in arch/, each callsite should be changed to do
> > 
> > 	if ((task_utrace_flags(current) & UTRACE_EVENT(SYSCALL_ENTRY)) &&
> > 		utrace_report_syscall_entry(regs))
> > 		ret = -1; // this depends on machine
> > 
> > instead of simply calling tracehook_report_syscall_entry().
> 
> That should be in the utrace code?
> 
> I don't have a problem with having common code somewhere,
> just not a whole layer whose only purpose seems to be obfuscation.

One man's obfuscation is another man's abstraction.
Would you be satisfied if "tracehook_" was renamed "utracehook_"?


- FChE
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/