lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jan]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC/PATCH] Implement new PTRACE_EVENT_SYSCALL_{ENTER,EXIT}
On 01/19, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
>
> On Friday, January 10 2014, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > So suppose that gdb does ptrace(PTRACE_SINGLESTEP) and the tracee
> > executes the "syscall" insn. What it should report?
> [...]
> > But what should syscall-exit do? Should it still report SIGSEGV as
> > it currently does, or should it report _SYSCALL_EXIT instead (if
> > PTRACE_O_SYSCALL_EXIT of course), or should it report both?
>
> Both only if _SYSCALL_EXIT is set. Otherwise, stick to the current
> behavior, I guess.

OK, both. In which order? Probably _EXIT first. But this looks a bit
strange. Suppose that the tracee reports _EXIT, then debugger does
ptrace(PTRACE_CONT), should the tracee report SIGTRAP?

SIGTRAP before _EXIT looks a bit strange too... Single-step trap should
be reported after insn, but we are still in syscall.

So perhaps _EXIT should win and do not report the step?

> Isn't it what my current patch does, by the way?

I forgot how this patch looks so I can be easily wrong, but iirc no.
Note that tracehook_report_syscall_exit() doesn't even call
ptrace_report_syscall() if step == T.

Btw, if you send v2, please CC Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>.

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-01-19 17:01    [W:0.096 / U:0.268 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site