Re: [PATCH 1/1] ptrace: fix ptrace_signal() && STOP_DEQUEUEDinteraction

From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Sun Jul 17 2011 - 15:06:55 EST

On 07/14, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 07/14, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >
> > Never mind. I for some reason thought flipping the flag would make
> > the extra step in ptrace_signal() unnecessary. We need to clear it
> > all the same so it doesn't really improve anything. I think the
> > current version should be fine
> Good.
> > (maybe the comment can be beefed up a
> > bit?).
> I agree, this is not the best comment... OK, I'll try to make a
> better one. Damn this is not easy ;) and I hate the really fat
> comments.

OK, how about v2? The patch is the same, only the comment was updated.
Not sure it is really better though.


[PATCH v2] ptrace: fix ptrace_signal() && STOP_DEQUEUED interaction

Simple test-case,

int main(void)
int pid, status;

pid = fork();
if (!pid) {
return 0x23;

assert(ptrace(PTRACE_ATTACH, pid, 0,0) == 0);
assert(wait(&status) == pid);
assert(WIFSTOPPED(status) && WSTOPSIG(status) == SIGSTOP);

kill(pid, SIGCONT); // <--- also clears STOP_DEQUEUD

assert(ptrace(PTRACE_CONT, pid, 0,0) == 0);
assert(wait(&status) == pid);
assert(WIFSTOPPED(status) && WSTOPSIG(status) == SIGCONT);

assert(ptrace(PTRACE_CONT, pid, 0, SIGSTOP) == 0);
assert(wait(&status) == pid);
assert(WIFSTOPPED(status) && WSTOPSIG(status) == SIGSTOP);

kill(pid, SIGKILL);
return 0;

Without the patch it hangs. After the patch SIGSTOP "injected" by the
tracer is not ignored and stops the tracee.

Note also that if this test-case uses, say, SIGWINCH instead of SIGCONT,
everything works without the patch. This can't be right, and this is

The problem is that SIGSTOP (or any other sig_kernel_stop() signal) has
no effect without JOBCTL_STOP_DEQUEUED. This means it is simply ignored
after PTRACE_CONT unless JOBCTL_STOP_DEQUEUED was set "by accident", say
it wasn't cleared after initial SIGSTOP sent by PTRACE_ATTACH.

At first glance we could change ptrace_signal() to add STOP_DEQUEUED
after return from ptrace_stop(), but this is not right in case when the
tracer does not change the reported SIGSTOP and SIGCONT comes in between.
This is even more wrong with PT_SEIZED, SIGCONT adds JOBCTL_TRAP_NOTIFY
which will be "lost" during the TRAP_STOP | TRAP_NOTIFY report.

So lets add STOP_DEQUEUED _before_ we report the signal. It has no effect
unless sig_kernel_stop() == T after the tracer resumes us, and in the
latter case the pending STOP_DEQUEUED means no SIGCONT in between, we
should stop.

Note also that if SIGCONT was sent, PT_SEIZED tracee will correctly
report PTRACE_EVENT_STOP/SIGTRAP and thus the tracer can notice the fact
SIGSTOP was cancelled.

Also, move the current->ptrace check from ptrace_signal() to its caller,
get_signal_to_deliver(), this looks more natural.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>

kernel/signal.c | 17 +++++++++++------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

--- ptrace/kernel/signal.c~1_ptrace_signal_stop_dequeued 2011-07-17 20:16:36.000000000 +0200
+++ ptrace/kernel/signal.c 2011-07-17 20:57:30.000000000 +0200
@@ -2084,12 +2084,17 @@ static void do_jobctl_trap(void)
static int ptrace_signal(int signr, siginfo_t *info,
struct pt_regs *regs, void *cookie)
- if (!current->ptrace)
- return signr;
ptrace_signal_deliver(regs, cookie);
- /* Let the debugger run. */
+ /*
+ * We do not check sig_kernel_stop(signr) but set this marker
+ * unconditionally because we do not know whether debugger will
+ * change signr. This flag has no meaning unless we are going
+ * to stop after return from ptrace_stop(). In this case it will
+ * be checked in do_signal_stop(), we should only stop if it was
+ * not cleared by SIGCONT while we were sleeping. See also the
+ * comment in dequeue_signal().
+ */
+ current->jobctl |= JOBCTL_STOP_DEQUEUED;
ptrace_stop(signr, CLD_TRAPPED, 0, info);

/* We're back. Did the debugger cancel the sig? */
@@ -2193,7 +2198,7 @@ relock:
if (!signr)
break; /* will return 0 */

- if (signr != SIGKILL) {
+ if (unlikely(current->ptrace) && signr != SIGKILL) {
signr = ptrace_signal(signr, info,
regs, cookie);
if (!signr)

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