Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 00:02:21 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: owl-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: strace On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 11:52:05PM +0400, Dmitry V. Levin wrote: > On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 11:17:21PM +0400, Solar Designer wrote: > > On i686, it fails. It prints lots of restart_syscall() lines instead of > > the actual syscall info. > > Does it happen with i686 strace running under x86_64 or i686 kernel? Both of my tests today were under i686 host kernels. One was on host system (and newer kernel), the other OpenVZ container (and older kernel). I did not test this on x86_64 host today. Perhaps you're right and it'd work fine there, which is why we did not notice this earlier. > restart_syscall is syscall number 0. Could the difference between older > and newer asm/ptrace.h versions be so fatal? Without looking into this myself, I don't know. Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.