[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160127180811.684824199@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:14:41 -0800
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org, John Blackwood <john.blackwood@...r.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Subject: [PATCH 4.1 117/127] arm64: Clear out any singlestep state on a ptrace detach operation
4.1-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: John Blackwood <john.blackwood@...r.com>
commit 5db4fd8c52810bd9740c1240ebf89223b171aa70 upstream.
Make sure to clear out any ptrace singlestep state when a ptrace(2)
PTRACE_DETACH call is made on arm64 systems.
Otherwise, the previously ptraced task will die off with a SIGTRAP
signal if the debugger just previously singlestepped the ptraced task.
Signed-off-by: John Blackwood <john.blackwood@...r.com>
[will: added comment to justify why this is in the arch code]
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/ptrace.c
@@ -58,6 +58,12 @@
*/
void ptrace_disable(struct task_struct *child)
{
+ /*
+ * This would be better off in core code, but PTRACE_DETACH has
+ * grown its fair share of arch-specific worts and changing it
+ * is likely to cause regressions on obscure architectures.
+ */
+ user_disable_single_step(child);
}
#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT
Powered by blists - more mailing lists