Re: Q: perf_event && task->ptrace_bps[]

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 01/18, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 09:34:59PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Any idea how to fix this cleanly? May be we can reuse perf_event_mutex,
> > but this looks soooo ugly. And do_exit()->flush_ptrace_hw_breakpoint()
> > has the strange "FIXME:" comment which doesn't help me to understand
> > what can we do.
>
> Yeah forget about the FIXME, it's a stale thing I need to remove.

OK, good.

> > Probably the best fix is to change this code so that the tracer owns
> > ->ptrace_bps[], not the tracee. But this is not trivial, and needs a
> > lot of changes in ptrace code.
>
> How much complicated would it be?

The problem is, ptrace_detach/release_task can't sleep currently.
The necessary changes are nasty.

> Because I see three solutions to solve this:
>
> - Have a mutex inside thread->ptrace_bps. The contention must be
> rare and only concern ptrace and tracee exit. That's the simplest.

I think we can reuse perf_event_mutex for this. Not very good too,
but simple. But this depends on what can we do under this mutex...

I am going to report a couple more bugs (at least, it looks like
a bug when I am trying to understand the code ;), probably they
should be fixed first.

Oleg.

--
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/