Re: [PATCH 3/7] ptrace: move SIGTRAP on exec(2) logic to ptrace_event()

From: Tejun Heo
Date: Tue Jun 21 2011 - 03:26:54 EST


On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Why does this make ptrace_event() smarter?
> OK, tracehooks should die. But why should we move this special case
> into ptrace_event? Say, a simple
>        static inline void ptrace_exec_event(...)
>        {
>                if (!ptrace_event_enabled(PTRACE_EVENT_EXEC))
>                        send_sig(SIGTRAP, current, 0);
>                else
>                        ptrace_event(PTRACE_EVENT_EXEC);
>        }
> in fs/exec.c looks a bit better to me.

The intention is to concentrate ptrace specific logic in
ptrace_event(). We'll have more of them, mostly dependent on
PT_SEIZED and I don't think it's a good idea to scatter them across
the kernel. They're of no interest outside of ptrace after all. I
think it's better to have them collected in one place than scattered
around. The PT_SEIZED ones would probably have some commonalities
among them too.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at