Date: 09 Oct 2001 15:27:42 +0200 From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, <arch@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Removing ptrace(2)'s dependency on procfs(5) Message-ID: <xzpu1x9eyep.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> In-Reply-To: <20011009221951.B25192-100000@delplex.bde.org> References: <20011009221951.B25192-100000@delplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> writes: > The correctness of not looping depends on nothing except the parent > making the process runnable (unless the process loses its P_TRACED > attribute). This is apparently what happens, since things have worked > for so long. But I don't completely understand what happens when a > signal is sent to the process. The comment before this section of > code suggests looping. ...but the code will never loop, because trace_req() always returns 1. What intrigues me further is that trace_req() used to always return 0, and the log entry for the commit that changed it does not explain why it changed to returning 1. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpu1x9eyep.fsf>