[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YrSC8AxEV24IgSbm@li-4a3a4a4c-28e5-11b2-a85c-a8d192c6f089.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2022 17:12:48 +0200
From: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...nel.org, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"Robert O'Callahan" <roc@...nos.co>, Kyle Huey <khuey@...nos.co>,
Keno Fischer <keno@...iacomputing.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] ptrace: Stop supporting SIGKILL for PTRACE_EVENT_EXIT
On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 11:43:37AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Recently I had a conversation where it was pointed out to me that
> SIGKILL sent to a tracee stropped in PTRACE_EVENT_EXIT is quite
> difficult for a tracer to handle.
>
> Keeping SIGKILL working for anything after the process has been killed
> is also a real pain from an implementation point of view.
>
> So I am attempting to remove this wart in the userspace API and see
> if anyone cares.
Hi Eric,
With this series s390 hits the warning exactly same way. Is that expected?
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists