public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
To: Andreas Hobein <ah2@delair.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>,
	Markus Gutschke <markus@google.com>
Subject: Re: Trouble with ptrace self-attach rule since kernel > 2.6.14
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2006 19:23:07 +0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060904152307.GA98@oleg> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200609041416.03945.ah2@delair.de>

On 09/04, Andreas Hobein wrote:
>
> Thank you all for your kind assistance. It turned out that using vfork() or 
> clone() would make a considerable redesign of my code necessary. While the 
> added overhead from a "real" fork plus communication of the result over pipes 
> is still acceptable, I currently have a lack of time to restructure my 
> application to work with vfork or clone and its intrinsic restrictions. Also 
> some more non-portable code would be added, which discourages me a bit also.

Could you test your application with 2.6.18-rc6 and this change

	-       if (task == current)
	+       if (task->tgid == current->tgid)

reverted? I think any report, positive or negative, would be useful.

It would be nice if your test covers different conditions, such as
'main thread debugs sub-thread' and vice versa. Exec under ptrace is
also interesting.

> Since I'm rather clueless with regard to the kernel internals I'm afraid I 
> can't add more value to this discussion other than to prove there is at least 
> a second application out there being affected by this patch.

It's a pity to disappoint you, but you may be the 3rd :) Found this
unanswered message:

	http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=114073955827139

(the author cc'ed)

Oleg.


  reply	other threads:[~2006-09-04 15:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-08-31 21:05 Trouble with ptrace self-attach rule since kernel > 2.6.14 Andreas Hobein
2006-09-01  7:36 ` Andreas Hobein
2006-09-01  7:49   ` Andrew Morton
2006-09-01 18:28     ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-02 17:03       ` Oleg Nesterov
2006-09-04 12:16         ` Andreas Hobein
2006-09-04 15:23           ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2006-09-04 15:56             ` Andreas Hobein
2006-09-04 21:42               ` Andreas Hobein
2006-09-04 22:00                 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-04 20:07             ` Markus Gutschke
2006-09-02 17:22       ` [PATCH] eligible_child: remove an obsolete ->tgid check Oleg Nesterov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20060904152307.GA98@oleg \
    --to=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
    --cc=ah2@delair.de \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=markus@google.com \
    --cc=roland@redhat.com \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox