lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Mar]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] introduce ptrace_reparented() helper
Date
> I am planning to do some changes in forget_original_parent (fix 2 very
> old minor bugs and _perhaps_ add some improvement). I hit the minor but
> nasty problem: this open coded __ptrace_unlink() in reparent_thread().
> _This_ is the actual reason for this patch.
>
> So. Would you object if I do
>
> --- kernel/ptrace.c 2008-03-03 17:01:06.000000000 +0300
> +++ kernel/ptrace.c 2008-03-05 20:22:44.801142777 +0300
> @@ -67,11 +67,12 @@ void ptrace_untrace(struct task_struct *
> * remove it from the ptrace list.
> *
> * Must be called with the tasklist lock write-held.
> + *
> + * Either the caller is ptracer, or the caller is ->real_parent
> + * and the child is not traced.
> */
> void __ptrace_unlink(struct task_struct *child)
> {
> - BUG_ON(!child->ptrace);
> -
> child->ptrace = 0;
> if (ptrace_reparented(child)) {
> list_del_init(&child->ptrace_list);
>
> ?

That seems ok. The duplication of magic in reparent_thread is indeed bad.
I don't think this BUG_ON is buying us much if we haven't hit it in a long
time.


Thanks,
Roland


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-03-06 09:11    [W:0.066 / U:0.072 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site