From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23948 invoked by alias); 5 Nov 2014 10:55:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 23936 invoked by uid 89); 5 Nov 2014 10:55:22 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 05 Nov 2014 10:55:20 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id sA5AtD5m021097 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 5 Nov 2014 05:55:13 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id sA5AtBRs018838; Wed, 5 Nov 2014 05:55:12 -0500 Message-ID: <545A020F.6080104@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 10:55:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Colascione , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Warn users about mismatched PID namespaces References: <5451AB7E.40709@dancol.org> <54522DC7.2090100@redhat.com> <54522FE0.9050508@dancol.org> <545233C8.4070402@redhat.com> <5452345D.4040601@dancol.org> <5452391C.8020709@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <5452391C.8020709@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2014-11/txt/msg00098.txt.bz2 On 10/30/2014 01:11 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 10/30/2014 12:51 PM, Daniel Colascione wrote: >> On 10/30/2014 12:49 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: >>> On 10/30/2014 12:32 PM, Daniel Colascione wrote: >>>> On 10/30/2014 12:23 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: >>>>> On 10/30/2014 03:07 AM, Daniel Colascione wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/gdb/linux-thread-db.c b/gdb/linux-thread-db.c >>>>>> index 352fac1..4089417 100644 >>>>>> - --- a/gdb/linux-thread-db.c >>>>>> +++ b/gdb/linux-thread-db.c >>>>>> @@ -1223,6 +1223,25 @@ thread_db_new_objfile (struct objfile *objfile) >>>>>> static void >>>>>> thread_db_inferior_created (struct target_ops *target, int from_tty) >>>>>> { >>>>>> + /* If the child is in a different PID namespace, its idea of its PID >>>>>> + will differ from our idea of its PID. When we scan the child's >>>>>> + thread list, we'll mistakenly think it has no threads since the >>>>>> + thread PID fields won't match the PID we give to >>>>>> + libthread_db. */ >>>>> >>>>> Why not give libthread_db the right PID then? >>>> >>>> How do you suggest find it? >>> >>> Isn't it visible somewhere in /proc ? >> >> Not AFAICT, but maybe I overlooked something. > > Oh well... FYI, looks like exposing the info in /proc is in the works as well. I just stumbled uppon this: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/5/174 Thanks, Pedro Alves