linux-kernel - Re: [patch 2/2] Use the stack frames to get exact stack-traces for CONFIG

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

Date:	Tue, 8 Jan 2008 08:11:29 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...x.de, hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] Use the stack frames to get exact stack-traces for
	CONFIG_FRAMEPOINTER on x86-64


* Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org> wrote:

> x86 32 bit already has this feature: This patch uses the stack frames 
> with frame pointer into an exact stack trace, by following the frame 
> pointer. This only affects kernels built with the CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER 
> config option enabled, and greatly reduces the amount of noise in 
> oopses.

nice! Applied.

> The code tries to use the frame pointers to do a backtrace, but if it 
> smells iffy or invalid, falls back to the traditional way of printing 
> backtraces, to make sure that at least some useful backtrace is 
> created.
>
> Due to the fragility and importance of the backtrace code, this needs 
> to be well reviewed and well tested before merging into mainlne.

yeah, agreed. But i think this is still fundamentally more robust than 
the unwind info based backtracer. Cool stuff!

	Ingo
--
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/