From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id F14E1385E009; Sat, 9 Mar 2024 01:29:10 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org F14E1385E009 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1709947750; bh=VY8sGex3kbyK8zEanIoQeCmJWgLLCX6wXATiryOytYs=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=A8VAoi4aozaJFSS5rmh2NgawjEJIu/JRQLz3aPnL+ygpn6Q5YfRD3CjU23FH4UiRN T/hw1HOktskIcMvg0XseJcXSdpGr8OQpd0HC5jNFl3+YKFGuP0cRWNOfUJAcxUL0Yh 7SgH6ncge5vECTooIQ824nkFAzhHPO5r0AWQ9dVk= From: "cel at linux dot ibm.com" To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug testsuite/31312] attach-many-short-lived-threads gives inconsistent results Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2024 01:29:10 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb X-Bugzilla-Component: testsuite X-Bugzilla-Version: HEAD X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: cel at linux dot ibm.com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 15.1 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D31312 --- Comment #13 from Carl E Love --- I did reach out to the kernel community about this. There are some timing issues that can cause the kernel to legitimately return EPERM. He pointed = me to the ptrace Linux man page. Another possible cause for the EPERM is if ptrace is already connected to the process. I tried to determine if this w= as in fact the case. Specifically if the detach hadn't completed yet but was = not able to show that was the failure case.=20=20 Basically, the kernel team didn't seem to think it the EPERM result was a kernel bug. That discussion really didn't go very far. I will put together a patch to have Power 10 just exit the test on an EPERM error and attach it to the bugzilla for review. Thanks for the feedback. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=