| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2009 10:01:08 +0200 From: Stefani Seibold <stefani@...bold.net> To: Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, Joerg Engel <joern@...fs.org> Subject: Re: Detailed Stack Information Patch [2/3] Am Freitag, den 03.04.2009, 09:32 +0200 schrieb Mikael Pettersson: > Stefani Seibold writes: > > I think a user space daemon will be the a good way if the /proc/*/maps > > or /proc/*/stack will provide the following information: > > > > - start address of the stack > > - current address of the stack pointer > > - highest used address in the stack > > You're assuming > 1. a thread has exactly one stack > 2. the stack is a single unbroken area > 3. the kernel knows the location of this area > > None of these assumptions are necessarily valid, esp. in > the presence of virtualizers, managed runtimes, or mixed > interpreted/JIT language implementations. We are talking about the kernel view. And from this point a thread has only one stack and it is a single mapped continuous area. There are only one exception and that is the sigaltstack(). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists