On 08/24, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 8:57 AM Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > force_exit_sig(SIGILL) can't be ignored too. But I am fine either way. > > Current SIGILL sending is already pretty bad behavior that bites us > periodically, instead of doubling down on killing the user space > process because something about installing uprobe goes wrong, let's > think about a bit less destructive way to do this. Mark uprobe for a > particular process as defunct or "detaching it", or something along > those lines. But not just kill innocent processes.
Well. Yes, SIGILL sending acts as BUG_ON(), this is not nice and probably we can improve the current code. And, just in case, as for uprobe_copy_process() in particular I agree that Option B (make fork() fail) is better. But what, say, uprobe_handle_trampoline() can do if ->return_instances is NULL? Either we have a kernel bug, or the probed task does something wrong. In both cases it is better to kill the task with pr_warn() and generate the core dump. Oleg.
