Re: [RFC] Proposal for ptrace improvements

From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Thu Mar 03 2011 - 14:35:10 EST


On 03/02, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 12:02:37PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > What do you think about SIGSTOP generated in in children on auto-attach
> > via PTRACE_O_TRACE[V]FORK / PTRACE_O_TRACECLONE options?
>
> Ah, you're right. I actually haven't been thinking about them.
>
> > IMHO, it would be good if we'd have a way to distinguish them from
> > real SIGSTOP signals.
>
> Yeah, probably.

Perhaps... but at first glance I think we should not change this
at all.

We are not going to change PTRACE_ATTACH, we can't. We are going
to add the new request which avoids tkill(SIGSTOP). The same with
PTRACE_O_TRACECLONE/etc imho. We need the better control on
auto-attach, but this needs another discussion.

Oleg.

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