Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 23 Feb 2011 17:44:27 +0100 | From | Jan Kratochvil <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/1] ptrace: make sure do_wait() won't hang after PTRACE_ATTACH |
| |
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 15:23:25 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 02/20, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > Now if new GDB should allow inferior functions calls on previously > > `(T) stopped' process doing PTRACE_CONT(SIGCONT) > > No, no, this won't work. You need to send SIGCONT via kill/tkill. Once > again, we can add the special case for PTRACE_CONT(SIGCONT), but please > look at Roland's comment: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=129796917823181 > > And given that currently gdb does PTRACE_CONT(0) this special case can't > help anyway unless you change gdb.
I would better play with a patched kernel.
> > but how to make it `(T) stopped' afterwards? PTRACE_CONT(SIGSTOP) > > right after the inferior call will make the old kernels run the inferior - we > > do not want that. > > Hmm... probably I am totally confused... but PTRACE_CONT(SIGSTOP) > should work in this case, the tracee reports SIGTRAP after the single-step > (if I understand correctly how gdb implements this).
The inferior call returns to a breakpoint (0xcc), this is the reason of the SIGTRAP at the end. I expect PTRACE_CONT(SIGSTOP) could work even in such case.
Thanks, Jan
| |