On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 06:35:13PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> Oops! I overlooked the need to preserve the orig_eax value, though its
> necessity is obvious. This makes me wonder about those previous
> reports that UML was working OK.
The one from me was on x86_64, where PTRACE_SYSEMU isn't a
> UML, obviously. Below is a smaller test. orig_eax is wrong, so you
> can't read the system call number from the process.
Oops! I overlooked the need to preserve the orig_eax value, though its
necessity is obvious. This makes me wonder about those previous
reports that UML was working OK.
I
On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 11:46:11PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> (It also works for free on other arch's if you want to #define the
> constants there.)
(Forgot to mention...) sweet
Jeff
--
Work email - jdike at linux dot intel dot com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the l
On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 11:46:11PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> Do you have a test case for PTRACE_SYSEMU that does not work right?
UML, obviously. Below is a smaller test. orig_eax is wrong, so you
can't read the system call number from the process.
With kernel-2.6.20-1.2948, it prints out a
> This chunk from linux-2.6-utrace.patch breaks PTRACE_SYSEMU, which UML
> rather relies on.
PTRACE_SYSEMU and PTRACE_SYSEMU_SINGLESTEP are implemented in a different
way (see kernel/ptrace.c), which does not require that assembly code.
(It also works for free on other arch's if you want to #def
This chunk from linux-2.6-utrace.patch breaks PTRACE_SYSEMU, which UML
rather relies on.
@@ -514,9 +514,6 @@ syscall_trace_entry:
movl %esp, %eax
xorl %edx,%edx
call do_syscall_trace
- cmpl $0, %eax
- jne resume_userspace# ret != 0 -> running under
6 matches
Mail list logo
