linux-kernel - Re: [lkp] [x86/mm/64] 4bc0303aff: BUG: stack guard page was hit at ffffc900001bbff8

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 10 Aug 2016 01:16:55 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
	kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@...el.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
	Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, LKP <lkp@...org>
Subject: Re: [lkp] [x86/mm/64] 4bc0303aff: BUG: stack guard page was hit at ffffc900001bbff8

On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Aug 2016 10:56:49 -0400
> Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, looking at the error path, if registering an ops cause a
>> ftrace_bug, then ftrace is completely (well, mostly) which means that
>                                                       ^
> I left out the word...                             disabled
>
>> if the user unregistered the ops, nothing would happen. It which case,
>
>   "In which case"
>
>> if it freed the ops after it failed, then we can have this case.
>>
>
> Not enough coffee on this Monday morning.
>

I suspect I can't usefully reproduce this bug without or without the
patch -- it took 0day weeks to hit it.  Want to just take it via your
tree or send it to Ingo directly?