Re: [PATCH 1/1] ptrace: make sure do_wait() won't hang afterPTRACE_ATTACH
From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Mon Feb 14 2011 - 10:40:31 EST
On 02/13, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 09 February 2011 15:18, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >
> > > > and I'm not really sure whether that's something worth achieving
> > > > at the cost of debugging capabilities especially when we don't _have_
> > > > to lose them.
> > >
> > > But we do not? I mean, at least this is not worse than the current
> > > behaviour.
> >
> > I think it's worse. With your changes, debuggers can't diddle the
> > tasks behind group stop's back which the current users already expect.
>
> But this "diddling behind group stop's back" is exactly the current
> problem with stop signals.
>
> Here I try to stop a ptraced process:
>
> $ strace -tt sleep 30
> 23:02:15.619262 execve("/bin/sleep", ["sleep", "30"], [/* 30 vars */]) = 0
> ...
> 23:02:15.622112 nanosleep({30, 0}, NULL) = ? ERESTART_RESTARTBLOCK (To be restarted)
> 23:02:23.781165 --- SIGSTOP (Stopped (signal)) @ 0 (0) ---
> 23:02:23.781251 --- SIGSTOP (Stopped (signal)) @ 0 (0) ---
> (I forgot again why we see it twice. Another quirk I guess...)
(this is correct, the tracee reports the signal=SIGSTOP, then
it reports it actually stopps with exit_code=SIGSTOP)
> 23:02:23.781310 restart_syscall(<... resuming interrupted call ...>) = 0
> 23:02:45.622433 close(1) = 0
> 23:02:45.622743 close(2) = 0
> 23:02:45.622885 exit_group(0) = ?
>
> Why sleep didn't stop?
Yes. And I think this all should be fixed.
Although, depending on how we change the kernel, strace may need the
fixes too.
> Because PTRACE_SYSCALL brought the task out of group stop at once,
> even though strace did try hard to not do so:
>
> ptrace(PTRACE_SYSCALL, $PID, 0x1, SIGSTOP) <-- note SIGSTOP!
Yes.
(just to clarify, data=SIGSTOP has no effect when the tracee reports
from do_signal_stop. iow, when it reports i-am-stopped)
But otherwise I agree, and that was my point too.
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/