Re: BUG? race between kswapd and ptrace (access_process_vm )

From: Rik van Riel (riel@conectiva.com.br)
Date: Wed Mar 07 2001 - 11:56:39 EST

Next message: Jochen Dolze: "Status of posix-ACL's"
Previous message: German Gomez Garcia: "Re: Problems with gdb and latest kernels (SIG32)"
In reply to: Manfred Spraul: "BUG? race between kswapd and ptrace (access_process_vm )"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Manfred Spraul wrote:

> Is kswapd now running without lock_kernel()?

Indeed ...

> Then there is a race between swapout and ptrace:
> access_process_vm() accesses the page table entries, only protected with
> the mmap_sem semaphore and lock_kernel().
>
> Isn't
>
> spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock);
>
> missing in access_one_page() [in linux/kernel/ptrace.c]?

You're probably right here ...

regards,

Rik

-- Linux MM bugzilla: http://linux-mm.org/bugzilla.shtml

Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...

http://www.surriel.com/ http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Jochen Dolze: "Status of posix-ACL's"
Previous message: German Gomez Garcia: "Re: Problems with gdb and latest kernels (SIG32)"
In reply to: Manfred Spraul: "BUG? race between kswapd and ptrace (access_process_vm )"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 07 2001 - 21:00:23 EST