linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/10] ptrace: remove the extra wake_up_process() from ptrace

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20110131103855.GD7459@htj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Mon, 31 Jan 2011 11:38:55 +0100
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
Cc:	oleg@...hat.com, jan.kratochvil@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] ptrace: remove the extra wake_up_process() from
 ptrace_detach()

Hello,

On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 10:46:01AM -0800, Roland McGrath wrote:
> NAK.  Let's have the wake_up_state(task, TASK_TRACED|TASK_STOPPED) version
> go in first.  That one will be more appropriate for -stable.  Even if we
> shortly remove it entirely in mainline, having the more conservative
> intermediate state in the git history will make any future problems more
> susceptible to bisection.

Yeap, sounds reasonable.  So, you're saying it can go away but should
be converted to safer sleep first, right?  I'll resequence the patches.

Thank you.

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