On 01/09, Pedro Alves wrote: > > On 01/07/2014 03:30 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > This way PTRACE_O_SYSCALL_* will work like other ptrace options which > > ask to report an event. > > +10^6. With PTRACE_SYSCALL/sysgood, we don't have a way to trace > syscalls when single-stepping, which isn't much of a problem for > strace, but of course is for GDB. That is one of the things the > new API should definitely sort out.
Hmm. I think this is a good point, but this needs more discussion. So suppose that gdb does ptrace(PTRACE_SINGLESTEP) and the tracee executes the "syscall" insn. What it should report? syscall-entry looks obvious, PTRACE_EVENT_SYSCALL_ENTER should be reported if PTRACE_O_SYSCALL_ENTER was set. But what should syscall-exit do? Should it still report SIGSEGV as it currently does, or should it report _SYSCALL_EXIT instead (if PTRACE_O_SYSCALL_EXIT of course), or should it report both? Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
