lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Dec]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 13/16] ptrace: reorganize __ptrace_unlink() and ptrace_untrace()
Hello,

On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 07:15:16PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> OK. Of course, I do not blame this patch, this mimics the current
> behaviour.
>
> But, afaics, this is not exactly right in the long term. Suppose
> that SIGNAL_STOP_STOPPED is set but the tracee is running (this can
> happen if, say, debugger resumes the tracee and exits). In this case,
> I think this thread should be stopped too.

Yes, that would be the more consistent behavior.

> IIRC, I already tried to do this, but the patch (or idea) was nacked
> because it means another user-visible change. However, if we want to
> really fix things, we should fix this case too. If SIGNAL_STOP_STOPPED
> is set, there should be no running threads after detach.

Aside from the user-visible change part, I don't think the
implemnentation would be difficult.

> Or. We can change the rules for ptrace_resume(), more on this later.

You haven't written this yet, right? (I reconfigured / migrated my
mail setup during past few days so things are still a bit shaky.)

Thank you.

--
tejun


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-12-21 18:57    [W:3.034 / U:0.164 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site