From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
Cc: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>,
io-uring <[email protected]>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <[email protected]>,
Stefan Metzmacher <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Don't show PF_IO_WORKER in /proc/<pid>/task/
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 15:48:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> (Oleg Nesterov's message of "Thu, 25 Mar 2021 21:40:15 +0100")
Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]> writes:
> On 03/25, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> So looking quickly the flip side of the coin is gdb (and other
>> debuggers) needs a way to know these threads are special, so it can know
>> not to attach.
>
> may be,
>
>> I suspect getting -EPERM (or possibly a different error code) when
>> attempting attach is the right was to know that a thread is not
>> available to be debugged.
>
> may be.
>
> But I don't think we can blame gdb. The kernel changed the rules, and this
> broke gdb. IOW, I don't agree this is gdb bug.
My point would be it is not strictly a regression either. It is gdb not
handling new functionality.
If we can be backwards compatible and make ptrace_attach work that is
preferable. If we can't saying the handful of ptrace using applications
need an upgrade to support processes that use io_uring may be
acceptable.
I don't see any easy to implement path that is guaranteed to work.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-25 20:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-25 16:43 [PATCH 0/2] Don't show PF_IO_WORKER in /proc/<pid>/task/ Jens Axboe
2021-03-25 16:43 ` [PATCH 1/2] kernel: don't include PF_IO_WORKERs as part of same_thread_group() Jens Axboe
2021-03-25 16:43 ` [PATCH 2/2] proc: don't show PF_IO_WORKER threads as threads in /proc/<pid>/task/ Jens Axboe
2021-03-25 19:33 ` [PATCH 0/2] Don't show PF_IO_WORKER " Eric W. Biederman
2021-03-25 19:38 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-03-25 19:40 ` Jens Axboe
2021-03-25 19:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-03-25 19:46 ` Jens Axboe
2021-03-25 20:21 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-03-25 20:40 ` Oleg Nesterov
2021-03-25 20:43 ` Jens Axboe
2021-03-25 20:48 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2021-03-25 20:42 ` Jens Axboe
2021-03-25 20:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-03-25 20:40 ` Jens Axboe
2021-03-25 21:44 ` Jens Axboe
2021-03-25 21:57 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2021-03-26 0:11 ` Jens Axboe
2021-03-26 11:59 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2021-04-01 14:40 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2021-03-25 22:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-03-26 0:08 ` Jens Axboe
2021-03-25 20:43 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-03-25 21:50 ` Jens Axboe
2021-03-25 20:44 ` Oleg Nesterov
2021-03-25 20:55 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-03-25 21:20 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2021-03-25 21:48 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2021-03-25 19:40 ` Jens Axboe
2021-03-25 20:32 ` Oleg Nesterov
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 \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/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