lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Oct]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 13/X] uprobes: introduce UTASK_SSTEP_TRAPPED logic
On 10/25, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote:
>
> No, you are right... my inference was wrong. On a core with a uprobe
> with an explicit raise(SIGABRT) does show the breakpoint.
>
> (gdb) disassemble start_thread2
> Dump of assembler code for function start_thread2:
> 0x0000000000400831 <+0>: int3
> 0x0000000000400832 <+1>: mov %rsp,%rbp
> 0x0000000000400835 <+4>: sub $0x10,%rsp
> 0x0000000000400839 <+8>: mov %rdi,-0x8(%rbp)
> 0x000000000040083d <+12>: callq 0x400650 <getpid@plt>
>
> Now, I guess we need to agree on what is the acceptable behavior in the
> uprobes case. What's your suggestion?

Well, personally I think this is acceptable.

Once again, uprobes were designed to be "system wide", and each uprobe
connects to the file. This int3 reflects this fact. In any case, I do
not see how we can hide these int3's. Perhaps we can fool ptrace/core,
but I am not sure this would be really good, this can add more confusion.
And the application itself can read its .text and see int3, what can
we do?

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-10-25 16:43    [W:0.182 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site