From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@googlemail.com>,
jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
indan@nul.nu
Subject: Re: Ptrace documentation, draft #1
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 17:52:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110516155253.GA20624@htj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110516153122.GA15856@redhat.com>
Hello,
I haven't read the whole thing yet but wanna comment on some.
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 05:31:22PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > Kernel delivers an extra SIGTRAP to tracee after execve syscall
> > returns. This is an ordinary signal (similar to one generated by kill
> > -TRAP), not a special kind of ptrace-stop. If PTRACE_O_TRACEEXEC option
> > is in effect, a PTRACE_EVENT_EXEC-stop is generated instead.
> >
> > ??? can this SIGTRAP be distinguished from "real" user-generated SIGTRAP
> > by looking at its siginfo?
>
> Afaics no. Well, except .si_pid shows that the signal was sent by the
> tracing process to itself.
If you do GETSIGINFO and look at si->si_code, user generated signals
can't have non-zero value there (assuming SETSIGINFO doesn't allow
uploading __SI_TRAP siginfo), so, if si->si_code contains SIGTRAP |
PTRACE_EVENT_* << 8, I think it reliably identifies a specific trap.
We probably want to add more PTRACE_EVENT_* so that each trap site can
be identified uniquely. Note that the si_code is also returned as
exit_code on wait(2) and combined with CLD_TRAPPED ptrace traps should
be reliably identifiable.
> > Note that restarting ptrace commands issued in ptrace-stops other than
> > signal-delivery-stop do NOT inject a signal, even if sig is nonzero. No
> > error is reported either. This is a cause of confusion among ptrace
> > users.
>
> Yes. Except syscall entry/exit. But in this case SET_SIGINFO doesn't work
> to add more confusion ;)
Yeah, I hate these signal injections. Maybe we can remove these if
SEIZED? Tracer might as well just do tkill(). I don't really see the
point of the signal injection feature.
> > Syscall-enter-stop and syscall-exit-stop are indistinguishable by
> > tracer.
>
> Almost... at least on x86 rax = -ENOSYS in syscall-enter-stop.
We can add PTRACE_EVENT_* values if SEIZED.
> > ptrace(PTRACE_cmd, pid, 0, sig);
> > where cmd is CONT, DETACH, SYSCALL, SINGLESTEP, SYSEMU,
> > SYSEMU_SINGLESTEP. If tracee is in signal-delivery-stop, sig is the
> > signal to be injected. Otherwise, sig is ignored.
>
> There is another special case. If the tracee single-stepps into the
> signal handler, it reports SIGTRAP as if it recieved this SIGNAL.
> But ptrace(PTRACE, ..., sig) doesn't inject after that.
Ditto as PTRACE_SYSCALL. I think resuming from signal delivery trap
should be the only place where @data means signo.
> > Is signal injected if they were in signal-delivery-stop?
>
> Yes, The tracee resumes and handles the previously reported signal.
Please note that this one really isn't an injection. It's just given
a chance to either suppress or alter a signal which is being
delivered. It's not creating a new one.
Thank you.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-16 15:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-15 20:35 Denys Vlasenko
2011-05-16 9:15 ` Tejun Heo
2011-05-16 15:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-05-16 15:52 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2011-05-16 16:53 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-05-16 17:20 ` Tejun Heo
2011-05-16 17:48 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-05-18 15:02 ` Denys Vlasenko
2011-05-18 15:02 ` Denys Vlasenko
2011-05-19 19:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-05-20 18:02 ` Denys Vlasenko
2011-05-23 12:10 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-05-23 14:10 ` ptrace_resume->wake_up_process (Was: Ptrace documentation, draft #1) Oleg Nesterov
2011-05-23 16:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-05-23 17:23 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-05-25 20:08 ` [GIT PULL] PTRACE_KILL/wakeup fix for v2.6.40 Oleg Nesterov
2011-05-23 17:05 ` [PATCH 0/2] Was: ptrace_resume->wake_up_process Oleg Nesterov
2011-05-23 17:05 ` [PATCH 1/2] ptrace: ptrace_resume() shouldn't wake up !TASK_TRACED thread Oleg Nesterov
2011-05-23 17:05 ` [PATCH 2/2] signal: sys_pause() should check signal_pending() 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=20110516155253.GA20624@htj.dyndns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=indan@nul.nu \
--cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vda.linux@googlemail.com \
/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
Powered by JetHome