From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Apr 3 16:48:39 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from tarantula.cse.Buffalo.EDU (tarantula.cse.Buffalo.EDU [128.205.39.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5961637B400 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 16:48:35 -0800 (PST) Received: (from rc27@localhost) by tarantula.cse.Buffalo.EDU (8.11.6+Sun/8.10.1) id g340mOO18894; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 19:48:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 19:48:24 -0500 (EST) From: Ramkumar Chinchani To: "Tim J. Robbins" Cc: Subject: Re: Ptracing each other In-Reply-To: <20020404095514.A6743@treetop.robbins.dropbear.id.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Can two processes track each other through the proc file system then? I want a scenario where process P1 and P2 track each others execution. Is this possible at all? Thanks. -Ram ==> Tim J. Robbins /9:55am/Apr 4, 2002 <== [On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 06:20:13PM -0500, Ramkumar Chinchani wrote: [ [> What are the pitfalls in two processes ptracing each other? [> [> Are there possibilities of deadlocks? [ [Yes. [http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/29741 [Last time I checked, both -STABLE and -CURRENT are affected by this bug. [ [ [Tim [ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message