Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] ptrace: Order and comment PT_flags
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date: 2021-10-14 14:28:14
Also in:
lkml
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date: 2021-10-14 14:28:14
Also in:
lkml
On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 10:31:22AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
On Sat, Oct 09, 2021 at 12:07:57PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:quoted
Add a comment to the PT_flags to indicate their actual value, this makes it easier to see what bits are used and where there might be a possible hole to use. Notable PT_SEIZED was placed wrong, also PT_EVENT_FLAG() space seems ill defined, as written is seems to be meant to cover the entire PTRACE_O_ range offset by 3 bits, which would then be 3+[0..21], however PT_SEIZED is in the middle of that.Why do you think PT_EVENT_FLAG() should cover all the PTRACE_O_* options? Just going by the name and current callers, I'd only expect it to cover the PTRACE_EVENT_* flags, no?
Because PT_EXITKILL and PT_SUSPEND_SECCOMP are also exposed in that same mapping. Ideally we'd change PT_OPT_FLAG_SHIFT to 8 or something and have the high 24 bits for OPT and then use the low 8 bits for SEIZED and the new flags.