From: David Smith <dsmith@redhat.com>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@us.ibm.com>,
systemtap <systemtap@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: ERROR: The effective user ID of staprun must be set to the root user.
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:27:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <496B8B1F.2040503@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090109210947.4C290FC3DF@magilla.sf.frob.com>
Roland McGrath wrote:
> Check the Uid: and Cap*: lines in /proc/PID/status for the process
> at each step. Compare with your small test program.
On f9 (2.6.27.5-41.fc9.x86_64), where this works as desired, I see this:
- 1st staprun:
Uid: 5183 0 0 0
CapInh: 0000000000000000
CapPrm: ffffffffffffffff
CapEff: ffffffffffffffff
CapBnd: ffffffffffffffff
- stapio:
Uid: 5183 5183 5183 5183
CapInh: 0000000000000000
CapPrm: 0000000000000000
CapEff: 0000000000000000
CapBnd: ffffffffffffffff
- 2nd staprun:
Uid: 5183 0 0 0
CapInh: 0000000000000000
CapPrm: ffffffffffffffff
CapEff: ffffffffffffffff
CapBnd: ffffffffffffffff
Note that the 1st staprun output and the 2nd staprun output are the
same, which is how it should be.
On rawhide (2.6.29-0.18.rc0.git9.fc11.x86_64), where I see the problem,
I see this:
- 1st staprun:
Uid: 5183 0 0 0
CapInh: 0000000000000000
CapPrm: ffffffffffffffff
CapEff: ffffffffffffffff
CapBnd: ffffffffffffffff
- stapio:
Uid: 5183 5183 5183 5183
CapInh: 0000000000000000
CapPrm: 0000000000000000
CapEff: 0000000000000000
CapBnd: ffffffffffffffff
- 2nd staprun:
Uid: 5183 5183 5183 5183
CapInh: 0000000000000000
CapPrm: 0000000000000000
CapEff: 0000000000000000
CapBnd: ffffffffffffffff
As you can see, the 2nd staprun's uid/cap output looks like the setuid
permissions of staprun didn't take effect for some unknown reason.
I've done the same thing as the above with my little test program on my
rawhide system, and the output looks just like the (correct) f9 output
shown above.
> Try booting with "no_file_caps" (I really don't know the stuff
> that disables, but it's something).
I've done this, but it didn't make any noticeable difference.
--
David Smith
dsmith@redhat.com
Red Hat
http://www.redhat.com
256.217.0141 (direct)
256.837.0057 (fax)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-12 18:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-08 23:01 Jim Keniston
2009-01-09 15:17 ` David Smith
2009-01-09 15:50 ` David Smith
2009-01-09 20:33 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2009-01-09 20:50 ` David Smith
2009-01-09 21:10 ` Roland McGrath
2009-01-12 18:27 ` David Smith [this message]
2009-01-12 20:00 ` Roland McGrath
2009-01-09 21:11 ` Jim Keniston
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=496B8B1F.2040503@redhat.com \
--to=dsmith@redhat.com \
--cc=fche@redhat.com \
--cc=jkenisto@us.ibm.com \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=systemtap@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).