[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220413132451.GA27281@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2022 15:24:52 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: rjw@...ysocki.net, mingo@...nel.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, mgorman@...e.de,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tj@...nel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] sched,ptrace: Fix ptrace_check_attach() vs PREEMPT_RT
Hi Peter,
I like 1-2 but I need to read them (and other patches) again, a
couple of nits right now.
On 04/12, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> +static int __ptrace_freeze_cond(struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + if (!task_is_traced(p))
> + return -ESRCH;
if (!task_is_traced(p) || p->parent != current)
return -ESRCH;
we should not spin/sleep if it is traced by another task
> +static int __ptrace_freeze(struct task_struct *p, void *arg)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = __ptrace_freeze_cond(p);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + /*
> + * Task scheduled between __ptrace_pre_freeze() and here, not our task
> + * anymore.
> + */
> + if (*(unsigned long *)arg != p->nvcsw)
> + return -ESRCH;
> +
> + if (looks_like_a_spurious_pid(p))
> + return -ESRCH;
Oh, I do not think __ptrace_freeze() should check for spurious pid...
looks_like_a_spurious_pid() should be called once in ptrace_check_attach()
before task_call_func(__ptrace_freeze).
Oleg.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists