lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Feb]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: More waitpid issues with CLONE_DETACHED/CLONE_THREAD


On Mon, 2 Feb 2004, Andries Brouwer wrote:
>
> So, I think what happens is that PTRACE_KILL immediately after the PTRACE_CONT
> works because there is no schedule in between, so the effect of PTRACE_KILL
> is still seen by the (grand)child.

Well, Duh! You'r eobviously right.

PTRACE_KILL is a special case, since it's supposed to work _regardless_ of
whether the process being traced is actually stopped for tracing or not.

And Roland is correct that PTRACE_KILL works fine _if_ it is stopped.

But for the case where it isn't (and Daniel's program isn't, since it did
the PTRACE_CONT), PTRACE_KILL does nothing.

> Maybe there is no bug.

No, I do believe that PTRACE_KILL is supposed to kill the child even if it
wasn't synchronized. See the special case for "ptrace_check_attach()",
which allows a PTRACE_KILL to happen even for a nonsynchronized target.

Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.072 / U:0.872 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site