[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F32B924.8080407@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:04:20 +0000
From: Pedro Alves <palves@...hat.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
CC: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@...hat.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Andrew Vagin <avagin@...nvz.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ptrace: add ability to get clear_tid_address
On 02/08/2012 05:31 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/08, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>
>> I just tried it. This is &pthread->tid in glibc/libpthread, so with debug
>> info it's easy to figure out where to set the watchpoint manually with gdb
>> without asking the kernel. Doesn't work. ptrace doesn't show any trap
>> for the kernel writes.
>
> The tracee simply can't report this trap. it is already dead ;) and
> hw breakpoint (used by ptrace) is "pinned" to the thread.
Right, as I said. :-) I saw that a watchpoint trap isn't reported either
for the CLONE_CHILD_SETTID case (that is, within clone, when the kernel
writes the tid to the memory address passed in to the clone syscall).
I wouldn't have been surprised to see the trap in userspace in either
the parent or the child, though I'm not really surprised to not
see it either.
--
Pedro Alves
--
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