Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:31:33 -0400 From: Ken Smith <kensmith@cse.Buffalo.EDU> To: Vladimir Grebenschikov <vova@sw.ru> Cc: "current@freebsd.org" <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Unkillable process Message-ID: <20041027193133.GA27473@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> In-Reply-To: <1098880647.1062.22.camel@localhost> References: <1098870425.1062.14.camel@localhost> <417F9483.7040003@freebsd.org> <1098880551.1062.20.camel@localhost> <1098880647.1062.22.camel@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 04:37:27PM +0400, Vladimir Grebenschikov wrote:
> Looks like I should upgrade to 1.251:
>
> diff -u -r1.251 -r1.250
> --- sys/kern/kern_exit.c 23 Oct 2004 11:20:26 -0000 1.251
> +++ sys/kern/kern_exit.c 5 Oct 2004 18:51:11 -0000 1.250
> @@ -403,7 +403,7 @@
> * since their existence means someone is screwing up.
> */
> if (q->p_flag & P_TRACED) {
> - q->p_flag &= ~(P_TRACED | P_STOPPED_TRACE);
> + q->p_flag &= ~P_TRACED;
> psignal(q, SIGKILL);
> }
Yes, but before you do... :-)
If it's not too late can you do:
ps -o f -l
Or if anyone "succeeds" at wedging processes (especially if you
already have the above patch applied) can you try this?
I have a trivial procedure that produces unkillable processes
before the above patch, and this patch fixes that case. I've got
one person reporting that he can still get wedged processes even
with the above patch though so I'm looking for a bit more information.
Thanks...
--
Ken Smith
- From there to here, from here to | kensmith@cse.buffalo.edu
there, funny things are everywhere. |
- Theodore Geisel |
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041027193133.GA27473>