Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 6 Sep 2002 00:39:02 +0200 (CEST) | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [patch] ptrace-fix-2.5.33-A1 |
| |
On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> If we want to do this then we'd need to fix up every ptrace > implementation in every architecture to call the appropriate function; > it's a separate problem.
which code relies on having debugged children only in the ->children list and not in the ->ptrace_children list?
> > i'm not sure about this either. What happens if an (untraced) parent has > > traced and untraced children, and does a wait4. Would it confuse the > > debugger if the parent could get one of the traced tasks as a result in > > wait4? And how does the debugger solve this problem? > > Well, it seems to me that when a traced task has an event, it should be > reported first to the debugger - for signals this happens in do_signal - > and then possibly to the normal parent. But I'm not sure if this > actually happens right now or not. Worth investigating some more.
it just cannot happen. There are only two kinds of events passed via wait4: tracing related and exit related. An exiting task is not traced anymore. And two tasks cannot trace the same task - so it can never happen that wait4 wants to look at ->ptrace_children for events.
Ingo
- 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/
|  |