On 12/08, Eric W. Biederman wrote:Looking further, I think it was done to match the !is_task_stopped_or_traced() check in do_signal_stop(). Still, I don't understand why we really need this decrement. The ptrace interface needs only per-thread TASK_TRACED ot TASK_STOPPED, it doesn't need the completion of the group stop. We can delay the completion of the group stop, but why this is bad? At worse, the tracer recieves the extra CLD_STOPPED when the tracee resumes. And do_signal_stop() probably can s/is_task_stopped_or_traced/is_task_stopped/. OK, it is better to ignore this patch, I don't understand all implications of this change. But this all doesn't look very good. Suppose we have a lot of threads and the task with _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE does system call. So ptrace_notify() decrements the counter before syscall, after, and before the return to user-space. Hopefully Roland can clarify. Oleg. --
| Amit K. Arora | [RFC] Heads up on sys_fallocate() |
| Linus Torvalds | Linux 2.6.23-rc9 and a heads-up for the 2.6.24 series.. |
| Paul Jackson | Re: cpuset-remove-sched-domain-hooks-from-cpusets |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
git: | |
| Linus Torvalds | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| David Miller | Re: [klibc] [patch] import socket defines |
