From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 27 19:31:40 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D2B416A4CE; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:31:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU [128.205.32.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D18A043D31; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:31:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kensmith@cse.Buffalo.EDU) Received: from electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (kensmith@localhost [127.0.0.1]) i9RJVZIo027623; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:31:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from kensmith@localhost) by electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (8.12.10/8.12.9/Submit) id i9RJVXWJ027622; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:31:33 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:31:33 -0400 From: Ken Smith To: Vladimir Grebenschikov Message-ID: <20041027193133.GA27473@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> References: <1098870425.1062.14.camel@localhost> <417F9483.7040003@freebsd.org> <1098880551.1062.20.camel@localhost> <1098880647.1062.22.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1098880647.1062.22.camel@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: David Xu cc: "current@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: Unkillable process X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:31:40 -0000 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 |