lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Trouble with ptrace self-attach rule since kernel > 2.6.14
On 09/04, Andreas Hobein wrote:
>
> Thank you all for your kind assistance. It turned out that using vfork() or
> clone() would make a considerable redesign of my code necessary. While the
> added overhead from a "real" fork plus communication of the result over pipes
> is still acceptable, I currently have a lack of time to restructure my
> application to work with vfork or clone and its intrinsic restrictions. Also
> some more non-portable code would be added, which discourages me a bit also.

Could you test your application with 2.6.18-rc6 and this change

- if (task == current)
+ if (task->tgid == current->tgid)

reverted? I think any report, positive or negative, would be useful.

It would be nice if your test covers different conditions, such as
'main thread debugs sub-thread' and vice versa. Exec under ptrace is
also interesting.

> Since I'm rather clueless with regard to the kernel internals I'm afraid I
> can't add more value to this discussion other than to prove there is at least
> a second application out there being affected by this patch.

It's a pity to disappoint you, but you may be the 3rd :) Found this
unanswered message:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=114073955827139

(the author cc'ed)

Oleg.

-
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: 2006-09-04 17:25    [W:0.077 / U:0.928 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site