Re: linux-next: add utrace tree

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

Hi -

On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 05:25:13AM -0500, tytso@xxxxxxx wrote:
> [...]
> > > The killer app for this will be the ability to delete thousands of
> > > lines of code from GDB, strace, and all the various other tools that
> > > have to painfully work around the major interface gotchas of ptrace(),
> > > while at the same time making their handling of complex processes much
> > > more robust.
> > 
> > No. There is absolutely _no_ reason to believe that gdb et al would ever 
> > delete the ptrace interfaces anyway. 
> 
> More to the point, gdb *couldn't* use utrace, because utrace only
> exports a kernel API; not a syscall interface.

Yes, this might explain why Kyle wrote:

> > > [...] I believe that "utrace" is the kernel side of that
> > > API. [...]

> And if the Red Hat Toolchain folks are thinking about encouraging
> gdb to start creating out-of-tree kernel modules [...]  the Red Hat
> Toolchain group needs to be smacked upside the head...

Those keeping up will note that an ordinary in-tree, non-modular,
non-root-only, already-works-with-standard-gdb,
potentially-better-than-ptrace debugger interface has already been
prototyped & posted on lkml as an RFC.


- 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/