Re: [PATCH 1/4] 'catch syscall' feature -- Architecture-independent part

["Sérgio Durigan Júnior" <sergiodj@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

Hello Joel,

On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 23:06 -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote:

> That's correct. The short answer is that, if we make your catchpoint
> use a more generic type and base the actual implementation of
> breakpoint_ops methods, then, later on, when someone decides to
> implement a new kind of catchpoint with similar functionality,
> then all he should have to do is create a new breakpoint_ops vector
> with appropriate methods, and voila.

Right, so I think I got your idea ;-).

> Now, going back to your patch, I think it's important not to let
> best be the enemy of good either.  I think that the feature that
> you are proposing is interesting and would like to make sure that
> we don't lose your work.  I am about to go away on a trip, so will
> have little time to review the details of your patch, but looks like
> Michael has started on that. I would love for you to investigate
> my (ahem) Vision (double-ahem), and I'm ready to guide you as much
> as I can.  But I am equally happy to incorporate your approach
> if another maintainer looks at your code and OKays it.

I really appreciate your review, and will certainly investigate your
vision about how things should work. Also, let me know when you have
more time (probably when you get back from your trip) so we can talk
more about this and work together to implement things better.

Meanwhile, I'll try to understand and improve things by my own :-).

Regards,

-- 
Sérgio Durigan Júnior
Linux on Power Toolchain - Software Engineer
Linux Technology Center - LTC
IBM Brazil