Re: PATCH? tracehook_report_clone: fix false positives

[Roland McGrath]

> Oh, I never thought about attach && SIGCONT interaction...
> 
> But, tracehook_report_clone() has the same problems?

I don't follow.

> And if we move sigaddset to ptrace_task_init(), we should not worry about
> SIGCONT? Without CLONE_THREAD the new task is not visible to user-space yet.
> Even if we clone a sub-thread, ptrace_init_task() runs under ->siglock.
> If SIGCONT is already pending, copy_process() won't succeed.

It could be pending and blocked.

> Or do you mean something else?

Sorry, I don't think I understood what your question was.
I just pointed out that the element of PTRACE_ATTACH semantics
that would be changed unintentionally if you just replaced its
send_sig_info() call with ptrace_init_task() using sigaddset().


Thanks,
Roland
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/