[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 4/4] samples: Add example of using PTRACE_GETFD in conjunction with user trap
On 12/09, Christian Brauner wrote:
> >We can
> >add PTRACE_DETACH_ASYNC, but this makes me think that PTRACE_GETFD has
> >nothing
> >to do with ptrace.
> >
> >May be a new syscall which does ptrace_may_access() + get_task_file()
> >will make
> >more sense?
> >
> >Oleg.
> Once more since this annoying app uses html by default...
> But we can already do this right now and this is just an improvement.
> That's a bit rich for a new syscall imho...

I agree, and I won't really argue...

but the changelog in 2/4 says

The requirement that the tracer has attached to the tracee prior to the
capture of the file descriptor may be lifted at a later point.

so may be we should do this right now?

plus this part

@@ -1265,7 +1295,8 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(ptrace, long, request, long, pid, unsigned long, addr,

ret = ptrace_check_attach(child, request == PTRACE_KILL ||
- request == PTRACE_INTERRUPT);
+ request == PTRACE_INTERRUPT ||
+ request == PTRACE_GETFD);

actually means "we do not need ptrace, but we do not know where else we
can add this fd_install(get_task_file()).


 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-09 21:47    [W:0.064 / U:19.280 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site