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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2012 19:02:15 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] semantics of singlestepping vs. tracer exiting On 09/03, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > This is another reason to move enable/disable step into ptrace_stop(). > And in fact I had the patches a loong ago, but we need to cleanup > the usage of PT_SINGLESTEP/PT_BLOCKSTEP first. The tracer should > simply set/clear these PT_ flags and resume the tracee which should > check them and do user_*_single_step() in response. Found these patches, see the attachments.... And this also fixes the problems with DEBUGCTLMSR_BTF. The patches should be re-diffed, but I need to recall why I didn't send them, perhaps I noticed some problem... Oleg. View attachment "1_use_PT_STEP.patch" of type "text/plain" (2773 bytes) View attachment "2_ptrace_finish_resume.patch" of type "text/plain" (2980 bytes) View attachment "3_detach_dont_disable_step.patch" of type "text/plain" (594 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists