From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, will.deacon@arm.com,
mpe@ellerman.id.au, bigeasy@linutronix.de, gkohli@codeaurora.org,
neeraju@codeaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched: Introduce set_special_state()
Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 17:10:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180501151050.GA13094@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180501142251.GH12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 05/01, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 03:59:24PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 05/01, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >
> > > The only code I found that seems to care is ptrace_attach(), where we
> > > wait for JOBCTL_TRAPPING to get cleared. That same function has a
> > > comment about hiding the STOPPED -> RUNNING -> TRACED transition. So I'm
> > > assuming it needs to observe TRACED if it observes !TRAPPING.
> >
> > Yes, exactly.
> >
> > > But I don't think there's enough barriers on that end to guarantee this.
> > > Any ->state load after wait_on_bit() is, afact, free to have happened
> > > before the ->jobctl load.
> >
> > do_wait() does set_current_state() before it checks ->state or anything else.
>
> But how are ptrace_attach() and do_wait() related?
Yes.
> I guess I'm missing
> something fairly fundamental here.
You are missing the fact that ptrace API is very old and ugly ;)
Just one example. If the debugger knows that the task is STOPPED then it has
all rights to do, say,
ptrace(PTRACE_ATTACH, pid);
BUG_ON(pid != waitpid(pid, WNOHANG));
Or even do another ptrace() request right after ptrace(PTRACE_ATTACH) returns,
without do_wait().
And unless my memory fools me, gdb even has some test-cases for this... Not sure,
but it certainly looks at tracee->state in /proc before it does PTRACE_ATTACH,
because if it was already STOPPED then gdb won't have any notification from the
tracee.
> Anyway, does the below look ok?
Yes, thanks.
Oleg.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-01 15:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-30 14:17 [PATCH 0/2] sched,kthread: Fix TASK_PARKED and special sleep states Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-30 14:17 ` [PATCH 1/2] kthread: Fix kthread_parkme() wait-loop Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-30 14:17 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched: Introduce set_special_state() Peter Zijlstra
2018-04-30 16:45 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-04-30 19:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-01 9:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-01 13:59 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-05-01 14:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-01 15:10 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180501151050.GA13094@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=gkohli@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=neeraju@codeaurora.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).