Re: ptracing a task from core_pattern pipe

[Daniel Walker]

On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 10:48:07AM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On 03/19/2013 09:19 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >> The above is regarding the situation which I'm running my corepipe_app ,
> >> i.e. my system doesn't have a disk to save a core file for parsing.
> > 
> > Can't you process the data inplace? You do not need to save it to disk.
> 
> Daniel said:
> 
> >> I'm trying to get the "dumpers" registers and stack out when it fails.
> 
> Registers would be easy'ish to get from coredump:
> they are contained in note sections which are at the beginning
> of the coredump. You can implement necessary parsing without
> too much pain.
> 
> Getting at stack would be harder.

There exists /proc/<pid>/mem and /proc/<pid>/maps on these tasks. If
those don't work then that's a straight up defect..

> But by asking kernel to allow you to poke around dead task's
> address space with ptrace() calls you just shift difficulty away from you
> (today you need to implement in-memory ELF parsing) to kernel people
> (they will need to implement *and support* ptracing of coredumping
> tasks).
> 
> This is somewhat unfair, considering that coredumping code in kernel
> is already a source of many complications, and that kernel-side coding
> is harder than userspace.
> 
> I think you are lucky that ptrace attach even *works* on coredumping task.
> No documentation ever guaranteed such a thing.

There not much different from userspace between a task running, and one
dumping.. I think it should be the inverse, ptrace either needs to work
or the special case needs to be documented that it doesn't work.

However, I do agree that you can parse the core file..

Daniel
--
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/