lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Aug]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Q: user_enable_single_step() && update_debugctlmsr()
On 08/01, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>
> On 08/01/2012 03:01 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> Lets ignore uprobes which needs the changes anyway. This is
>> only used by ptrace and the task is stopped. So, unless I missed
>> something obvious, this update_debugctlmsr() is simply unneeded,
>> __switch_to/__switch_to_xtra should notice _TIF_BLOCKSTEP and do
>> update_debugctlmsr(DEBUGCTLMSR_BTF).
>
> It looks like it unless a processes ptraces itself (which does not make
> much sense anyway).

and forbidden ;) See ptrace_attach()->same_thread_group().

>> But, worse, isn't it wrong? Suppose that debugger switches to
>> another TIF_SINGLESTEP&& !TIF_BLOCKSTEP task, in this case
>> we "leak" DEBUGCTLMSR_BTF, no?
>
> __switch_to_xtra() should notice the difference in the TIF_BLOCKSTEP
> flag and disable it.

And how it can notice the difference if there is no difference?

(unless, of course debugger is TIF_BLOCKSTEP'ed).

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-08-01 16:41    [W:0.150 / U:0.512 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site