[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45EDBA1B.8050007@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2007 13:59:39 -0500
From: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>
To: Bill Irwin <bill.irwin@...cle.com>
CC: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Wanted: simple, safe x86 stack overflow detection
Bill Irwin wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 09:41:44PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> I suppose one could have a CONFIG_DEBUG_STACK_OVERFLOW that gets
>> the stacks from vmalloc which would catch any overflow with its
>> guard pages. This is you would need to change __pa() to handle
>> that too because there might be still some drivers that do
>> DMA on stack addresses. Would be somewhat ugly but doable.
>> But I have my doubts it is worth it again -- in my experience static
>> analysis works well enough to trace them down and
>> there are not that many anyways.
>
> In case anyone wants them, patches against v2.6.21-rc2-116-gbb648a0
> for this are available from http://oss.oracle.com/~wli/stack_paranoia/
> Chuck, is any of this of any use to you?
I said "simple." :)
In the 4k/4k stack i386 kernel, is there any fundamental reason it
can't be 4k/8k? We seem to be mostly hitting problems in overflowing
the IRQ stack... I think. Overhead would only be 4k per CPU for that.
-
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