Re: seccomp and ptrace. what is the correct order?

[Will Drewry]

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:09 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 05/22/2012 01:48 PM, Will Drewry wrote:
>>
>> That was my first thought too, so I ran a few simple tests.  gcc isn't
>> smart enough to not add ~344 bytes of code to get the number and
>> arguments for the x86/kernel/ptrace.c case I included (in the
>> naive-est of integrations).  But I don't know that it justifies the
>> extra patchwork or enforcing shared code across arches.
>>
>
> I suspect the construction of those inlines can be improved.

Seems likely - or just my use of them :)
--
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/