lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    Date
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1] ptrace: make sure do_wait() won't hang after PTRACE_ATTACH
    On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
    > On 02/14, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
    >>
    >> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
    >> > On 02/13, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
    >> >>
    >> >> $ strace -tt sleep 30
    >> >> 23:02:15.619262 execve("/bin/sleep", ["sleep", "30"], [/* 30 vars */]) = 0
    >> >> ...
    >> >> 23:02:15.622112 nanosleep({30, 0}, NULL) = ? ERESTART_RESTARTBLOCK (To be restarted)
    >> >> 23:02:23.781165 --- SIGSTOP (Stopped (signal)) @ 0 (0) ---
    >> >> 23:02:23.781251 --- SIGSTOP (Stopped (signal)) @ 0 (0) ---
    >> >>     (I forgot again why we see it twice. Another quirk I guess...)
    >> >
    >> >      (this is correct, the tracee reports the signal=SIGSTOP, then
    >> >       it reports it actually stopps with exit_code=SIGSTOP)
    >>
    >> Ah, I see. Is there any way debugger can distinguish between these two
    >> different stops?
    >
    > IIRC, the (only?) way to distinguish is to check last_siginfo != NULL
    > via ptrace(PTRACE_GETSIGINFO).

    What do you think strace needs to do when it sees second SIGSTOP
    (meaning "in theory", not "on current kernel which may be buggy")?

    ptrace(PTRACE_SYSCALL, $PID, 0x1, 0)?
    nothing?
    something else?

    --
    vda
    --
    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: 2011-02-14 19:01    [W:0.023 / U:0.036 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site