Re: [PATCH 1/1] ptrace: do_notify_parent_cldstop: fix the wrong->nsproxy usage

From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Wed May 27 2009 - 19:29:14 EST

On 05/26, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > While this change is correct in any case (I hope), I wonder whether
> > we need another one:
> [...]
> > If the sub-thread is not traced, but ->group_leader is, perhaps it makes
> > more sense to notify the leader's tracer, not parent?
> I don't think so.


> > Not that I think this is really important. Just curious about what was
> > the intent.
> Here is how I would describe the intent (admittedly this logic is
> retrospective, not necessarily articulated as such when the code was
> written). If the the triggering task is ptrace'd, this report is "for
> ptrace purposes"--even if it's the CLD_STOPPED case. Otherwise, what's
> being reported is "the whole POSIX process is now stopped as per POSIX
> definitions". The latter properly goes to the parent of the process,
> which is the group_leader->real_parent.

Yes. And I forgot that in this case the traced group_leader has already
reported CLD_STOPPED to tracer.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at