On 11/08, Pedro Alves wrote: > > On 11/07/2012 03:09 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > OK. Please see the untested/uncompiled (but trivial) patch below > > > > - it adds PTRACE_O_EXITKILL. A better name? > > > > - A better numeric value? Note that the new option is not equal to > > the last-ptrace-option << 1. Because currently all options have > > the event, and the new one starts the eventless group. 1 << 16 > > means we have the room for 8 more events. > > > > - it needs the convincing changelog for akpm > > > If this isn't inherited by the ptrace child's children, a fork child can > end up detached if the tracer dies before it had a chance of setting > the PTRACE_O_EXITKILL on the new auto-attached child.
It is copied like the other options. > Which sounds like another argument for PTRACE_O_INHERIT, as in: > http://sourceware.org/ml/archer/2011-q1/msg00026.html The point of PTRACE_O_INHERIT would be to attach newly-created threads and children without causing an event stop and the attendant overhead. this is another thing, I guess. > (it sounds like you need to use PTRACE_SEIZE+options too to plug > the race between PTRACE_ME/PTRACE_ATTACH and > setting PTRACE_SETOPTIONS). Agreed, PTRACE_SEIZE+options is better. > (For completeness, Windows' age old equivalent, > DebugSetProcessKillOnExit, it a tracer option, not tracee option, though > that's not as flexible.) Thanks ;) Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/