On 04/30, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 06:40:38PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > No, I think this (minor) problem is very old... At least, when I look
> > at 2.6.26 code I do not see anything which coould clear db regs on
> > detach.
>
> Ok, if so then the conversion to
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 08:44:25PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Change ptrace_detach() to call flush_ptrace_hw_breakpoint(child).
> This frees the slots for non-ptrace PERF_TYPE_BREAKPOINT users, and
> this ensures that the tracee won't be killed by SIGTRAP triggered by
> the active breakpoints.
>
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 06:40:38PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 04/29, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 08:44:25PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > index 776ab3b..33752d9 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/ptrace.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/ptrace.c
> > > @@ -467,6 +467,7 @@ static i
On 04/29, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 08:44:25PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > index 776ab3b..33752d9 100644
> > --- a/kernel/ptrace.c
> > +++ b/kernel/ptrace.c
> > @@ -467,6 +467,7 @@ static int ptrace_detach(struct task_struct *child,
> > unsigned int data)
> > /
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 08:44:25PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Change ptrace_detach() to call flush_ptrace_hw_breakpoint(child).
> This frees the slots for non-ptrace PERF_TYPE_BREAKPOINT users, and
> this ensures that the tracee won't be killed by SIGTRAP triggered by
> the active breakpoints.
>
Change ptrace_detach() to call flush_ptrace_hw_breakpoint(child).
This frees the slots for non-ptrace PERF_TYPE_BREAKPOINT users, and
this ensures that the tracee won't be killed by SIGTRAP triggered by
the active breakpoints.
Test-case:
unsigned long encode_dr7(int drnum, int enable, uns
6 matches
Mail list logo