From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Dec 30 18:26:26 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F1D8620
 for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Tue, 30 Dec 2014 18:26:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ie0-x22c.google.com (mail-ie0-x22c.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::22c])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 660E32B5A
 for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Tue, 30 Dec 2014 18:26:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ie0-f172.google.com with SMTP id tr6so13969002ieb.3
 for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Tue, 30 Dec 2014 10:26:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id
 :subject:to:cc:content-type;
 bh=6FaEKr/c9ODDzyUYTJNUJH+3nlIQ47efYULO5AElpao=;
 b=ri/rszMPudggBbq0IBdvJNT3D6eoVnWobO8uYwFV1+0pO2sv67FEB7fxyI8fcYMmUT
 nOI/FyVNI15LNaz8X5v8QFlqBrSIi6x3OrWkY4jLp2rzTj13LkT57y1Ru1zTh3SsPXOj
 oUV6iTCcRxerBL8NGCa3UVe2jnxHmJ3pplAInOQkny/IaQ5pyn0xUdsJpVrkAZ4f6fWQ
 Ja/1+QPxrXhhEd1G+SSOg/Cv06DhxXJTDJ2nlwNxoHwJRqWY3E2hQoyDRxFubCTzZmbX
 LWOX7JEp50H/xyX1enL/7zXjC8QsgNdlY3N6tTopFnOdUeJ78iZFc3C6CyV18BpLW2CX
 ljXw==
X-Received: by 10.42.41.146 with SMTP id p18mr46579433ice.52.1419963985781;
 Tue, 30 Dec 2014 10:26:25 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: carpeddiem@gmail.com
Received: by 10.107.0.85 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Dec 2014 10:26:04 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <3368390.qHnOScdmzK@shawnwebb-laptop>
References: <20141230111941.GE42409@kib.kiev.ua>
 <20141230140709.GA96469@stack.nl>
 <3368390.qHnOScdmzK@shawnwebb-laptop>
From: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 13:26:04 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 7--Aau4jyJgVhJrOIvw5R1nK1oM
Message-ID: <CAPyFy2DnHOAwpdK7VQB-MFEwqjGTQki83tWUeLoP8qrci0Yjug@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Disabling ptrace
To: Shawn Webb <lattera@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 18:26:26 -0000

On 30 December 2014 at 10:38, Shawn Webb <lattera@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm curious what the use case was that brought this up. And why the requester
> thinks it's actually useful.

I had one use case for this: LLDB's test suite includes a test for the
debugger handling failure from ptrace(PT_ATTACH, ...), and the test
used the Linux/OS X version of the change under discussion.

As it turns out that case can be easily tested by just having another
ptrace consumer already attached, and the author of the test in LLDB
switched to that approach instead.