On 03/26, Matt Helsley wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 01:00:28PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > > + ptrace_pid_vnr = nr;
> > > + if (unlikely(p->parent != p->real_parent)) {
> > > + rcu_read_lock();
> > > + ptrace_pid_vnr = task_pid_nr_ns(p, p->parent->nsproxy->pid_ns);
> >
> > Yes, this is what I meant.
> >
> > But we should not do this in do_fork().
>
> I'm puzzled. If not here, where should we do this? Or are you saying
> ptrace should take a reference to the pid,
Ah, no, sorry.
I meant tracehook_report_clone_complete should do this under "if (trace)".
And we need a helper to get the right pid, it could be used
by do_notify_parent() too, and (probably) we need more changes like this.
> > But once again. This change fixes the value in "tracee->ptrace_message == newpid",
> > but a quick grep shows that strace-4.5.19 doesn't use PTRACE_GETEVENTMSG at all.
>
> You are correct. However strace and gdb aren't necessarily the only users
> of ptrace so wouldn't it still be good to fix this?
Yes, agreed.
Oh. The only problem is utrace patches in -mm. I mean the possible textual
conflicts...
Oleg.
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
