mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andreas Hobein <ah2@delair.de>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>,
	Markus Gutschke <markus@google.com>
Subject: Re: Trouble with ptrace self-attach rule since kernel > 2.6.14
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2006 23:42:40 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200609042342.41184.ah2@delair.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200609041756.18343.ah2@delair.de>

> On Monday 04 September 2006 17:23, you wrote:
> > Could you test your application with 2.6.18-rc6 and this change
> >
> > 	-       if (task == current)
> > 	+       if (task->tgid == current->tgid)
> >
> > reverted? I think any report, positive or negative, would be useful.

Reverting this change in kernel 2.6.18-rc6 was successful, that means my 
application has the old behaviour as before 2.6.15. I don't know why patching 
the fedora kernel didn't lead to the same result.

I've tested tracing child threads from the parent thread as well as tracing 
siblings and parent threads from a child. All tests where successful when 
reverting the above mentioned changes.

I cannot judge wether reverting back to "if (task == current)" would cause 
trouble in other cases. On the other hand, I'm quite happy with my 
fork()/pipe() solution that works fine in my application so there is no need 
to go back from my point of view.

I started this discussion mainly to get more background information, why 
ptracing sibling threads is forbidden since kernel 2.6.15. I hope I 
understood correctly that this change was a trade-off between removing the 
self attach feature and elliminating many serious bugs. Thus I would 
understand if the change won't be reverted in future kernel versions.

Andreas

  reply	other threads:[~2006-09-04 21:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-08-31 21:05 Andreas Hobein
2006-09-01  7:36 ` Andreas Hobein
2006-09-01  7:49   ` Andrew Morton
2006-09-01 18:28     ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-02 17:03       ` Oleg Nesterov
2006-09-04 12:16         ` Andreas Hobein
2006-09-04 15:23           ` Oleg Nesterov
2006-09-04 15:56             ` Andreas Hobein
2006-09-04 21:42               ` Andreas Hobein [this message]
2006-09-04 22:00                 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-04 20:07             ` Markus Gutschke
2006-09-02 17:22       ` [PATCH] eligible_child: remove an obsolete ->tgid check Oleg Nesterov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200609042342.41184.ah2@delair.de \
    --to=ah2@delair.de \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=markus@google.com \
    --cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
    --cc=roland@redhat.com \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®