[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E57641A.7090909@draigBrady.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 10:15:06 +0100
From: Pádraig Brady <P@...igBrady.com>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
CC: Jovi Zhang <bookjovi@...il.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
dhowells@...hat.com, roland@...hat.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] coredump: fix pipe coredump when core limit is 0
On 08/25/2011 11:55 AM, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:03:35AM +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>
>> Drats I just noticed another problem with not being able to disable core dumps
>> for a process. The `timeout` command from coreutils now tries to propagate
>> the signal from the process it's monitoring up. But since core dumps
>> can't be disabled, abrt will attribute any crashes to `timeout` rather
>> than what it's monitoring. I'll guess we'll have to revert:
>> http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=commitdiff;h=5a647a0
>>
> That suggests to me that we need another flag that user space can control to
> override this behavior. It appears we may have one too - the PR_SET_DUMPABLE
> flag in the prctl syscall. Its not POSIX compliant so you'd have to ifdef it
> into coreutils, but it exists, and sounds like exactly what you'd need in the
> above case. Looking at do_coredump, clearing the PR_SET_DUMPABLE flag with
> prctl causes __get_dumpable to return 0, which skips all the code in do_coredump
> entirely. I think thats identical behavior to having a zero core limit skip the
> dump.
This would be the first use of prctl in coreutils,
but I think this should handle things.
thanks for that!
Pádraig.
--
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