rupprecht added a comment. In D106226#2891107 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D106226#2891107>, @teemperor wrote:
> Congrats on getting started on your first patch! I improving this error > message really seems like a good idea. > > From what I can see the error message here is identical to GDB's which is a > different project with an incompatible license. No idea if this is large > enough of a copy to bring us into the realm of copyright (not a lawyer), but > I think formulating our own (maybe even better?) error message would anyway > be a good idea. What about something along those lines: > > error: attach failed: <Whatever error we already would return here> (This > line is just the normal LLDB attach error) > Note that attaching might have failed due to the ptrace_scope security > policy > which restricts debuggers from attaching to other processes. See > the ptrace_scope documentation for more information: > https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/security/Yama.txt > The current ptrace_scope policy can be found here: > /proc/sys/kernel/yama/ptrace_scope It'd also be helpful to include the actual command to enable it, i.e. either `echo 0 | sudo tee /proc/sys/kernel/yama/ptrace_scope` or `sudo sysctl -w kernel.yama.ptrace_scope=0` (I think both commands are equivalent) > (Not sure how I feel about linking to some internet URL, but I couldn't find > any man page for Yama/ptrace_scope) It's part of the `ptrace` man page: https://manpages.debian.org/buster/manpages-dev/ptrace.2.en.html#/proc/sys/kernel/yama/ptrace_scope (I think a URL is probably fine though... maybe we could put one on LLDB's page if we're worried about kernel.org not having a stable URL) > Also I wonder how we could make sure we emit this diagnostic in cases where > the ptrace_scope is actually the reason for the failed attach. The proper way > to check this seems to be checking the `errno` after we call `ptrace` and > then propagate the error all the way back to `lldb` from `lldb-server`. From > the `lldb` side I don't think we have any way of knowing why the attach > actually failed so we would emit this error speculatively which doesn't seem > ideal. It still sounds like a better solution than having just this generic > error message that doesn't help anyone, so I think David's suggestion + a > FIXME is maybe a good compromise here. Can we have LLDB read the value of `/proc/sys/kernel/yama/ptrace_scope`, and only print the error if the file exists and is not 0? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D106226/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D106226 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
