Re: [PATCH 01/17] ptrace: remove silly wait_trap variable fromptrace_attach()

[Tejun Heo]

Hello,

On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 08:47:43PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 05/30, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > -	if (wait_trap)
> > -		wait_event(current->signal->wait_chldexit,
> > -			   !(task->group_stop & GROUP_STOP_TRAPPING));
> > +	wait_event(current->signal->wait_chldexit,
> > +		   !(task->group_stop & GROUP_STOP_TRAPPING));
> >  	return retval;
> 
> Well, it doesn't change anything, but only if ptrace_attach() succeeds.
> The caller should not wait if STOP_TRAPPING was already set by another
> tracer and we are going to fail. Afaics, nothing really bad can happen
> but still this doesn't look very clean.
> 
> And. Please note that this patch is buggy until 8/17 "use bit_waitqueue
> for TRAPPING", wait_event(current->signal->wait_chldexit) can hang forever
> in this case since we are not ->parent.

Ah, darn it.  It was part of later patch which got dropped and I just
salavaged this part and put it at the front forgetting about the
chldexit conversion.

> I agree, wait_trap should go away. We can hit STOP_TRAPPING after attach
> if we change detach to set this bit. But perhaps it would be more clean
> to not call wait_event/wait_bit unconditionally anyway, we can check
> retval == 0.

Yeap, that sounds about right.  Will post updated patch.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/