Messages in this thread | | | From | Pedro Alves <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 03/10] ptrace: implement PTRACE_SEIZE | Date | Tue, 24 May 2011 10:49:58 +0100 |
| |
On Friday 20 May 2011 10:31:11, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:27:35AM +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: > > Okay, good to hear that. Looks like the tracer can do: > > > > SEIZE,execve,SETOPTS,'readlink /proc/pid/exe' > > > > and pretend it SEIZED after the execve. > > Yeap, and I was trying to say that if tracer and tracee are running on > different CPUs, the order between SEIZE and execve isn't even well > defined (sans the nasty automatic SIGTRAP).
I see, indeed, thanks.
A couple interface questions that just crossed my mind:
- on a fork/vfork/clone, if PTRACE_EVENT_FORK|VFORK|CLONE have been enabled, will the tracer still see the new child stop with a SIGSTOP, or will it see a PTRACE_EVENT_INTERRUPT?
- is PTRACE_INTERRUPT on PTRACE_TRACEME-traced-child planed to be allowed (for convenience)? A PTRACE_O_TRACEINTERRUPT, or some such PTRACE_SETOPTIONS option might be necessary to get PTRACE_EVENT_INTERRUPT instead of SIGSTOP in the point above.
-- Pedro Alves
| |