[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <509BAD00.9060600@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 13:00:48 +0000
From: Pedro Alves <palves@...hat.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
CC: Amnon Shiloh <u3557@...o.sublimeip.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>,
Chris Evans <scarybeasts@...il.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, u3557@...lix.com.au,
security@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PT_EXITKILL (Was: pdeath_signal)
On 11/08/2012 12:44 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 11/08, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> If this isn't inherited by the ptrace child's children, a fork child can
>> end up detached if the tracer dies before it had a chance of setting
>> the PTRACE_O_EXITKILL on the new auto-attached child.
>
> It is copied like the other options.
Oh, you're right. I got confused - GDB has code to always set options
on the fork children after PTRACE_EVENT_(V)FORK. Dunno where that came from.
>> Which sounds like another argument for PTRACE_O_INHERIT, as in:
>> http://sourceware.org/ml/archer/2011-q1/msg00026.html
>
> The point of PTRACE_O_INHERIT would be to attach newly-created threads and
> children without causing an event stop and the attendant overhead.
>
> this is another thing, I guess.
Yes, yes.
--
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