[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110721165137.GA21345@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 18:51:37 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>
Cc: mtk.manpages@...il.com, Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] man ptrace: add extended description of various ptrace
quirks
On 07/21, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>
> Deleted several outright false statements:
> - pid 1 can be traced
> - tracer is not shown as parent in ps output
> - PTRACE_ATTACH is not "the same behavior as if tracee had done
> a PTRACE_TRACEME": PTRACE_ATTACH delivers a SIGSTOP.
> - SIGSTOP _can_ be injected.
Yes, this is correct, thanks.
> +Tracer can not assume that tracee ALWAYS ends its life by reporting
> +WIFEXITED(status) or WIFSIGNALED(status).
> +.LP
> +.\" or can it? Do we include such a promise into ptrace API?
IIRC, we already discussed this... The traced group leader can
disappear during mt-exec, otherwise the tracee can never go away
silently.
> +Tracer can kill a tracee with ptrace(PTRACE_KILL, pid, 0, 0). This
> +operation is deprecated, use kill(SIGKILL) or tgkill(SIGKILL) instead.
> +The problem with this operation is that it requires tracee to be in
> +signal-delivery-stop, otherwise it may not work (may complete
> +successfully but won't kill the tracee),
In short, ptrace(PTRACE_KILL) is more or less ptrace(PTRACE_CONT, SIGKILL),
but it always returns 0. IOW, it never worked as decribed in the man
page. And I guess today nobody can explain why PTRACE_KILL exists.
Oleg.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists