[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080123190742.GH12877@cvg>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 22:07:42 +0300
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To: Paulo Marques <pmarques@...popie.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] POWERPC: use KSYM_NAME_LEN
[Paulo Marques - Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 06:59:09PM +0000]
> Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>> [Paulo Marques - Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 06:26:28PM +0000]
>>> Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>> case 's':
>>>> - getstring(tmp, 64);
>>>> + getstring(tmp, sizeof(tmp));
>>>> if (setjmp(bus_error_jmp) == 0) {
>>>> catch_memory_errors = 1;
>>>> sync();
>> just after that poin in the original code a call to kallsyms_lookup_name
>> is done - so i think it could be an overflow (of course it depends
>> on what *exactly* the name is being searched, and Paulo - I didn't
>> managed to get *the whole picture* of what is going on in this
>> code - so the thoughs were like: kallsyms_lookup_name could find
>> a quite long name restricted by KSYM_NAME_LEN (dunno how it could
>> happens - due to buggy code or due to memory corruption outside,
>> it does not matter - the only matter - it *could* find that long
>> name).
>
> Ah, now I understand your confusion: kallsyms_lookup_name doesn't fill the
> name. It searches the name and returns the address. It is the _caller_ that
> fills the name, not kallsyms_lookup_name.
>
> It is used for stuff like: "give me the address of function foo":
> addr = kallsyms_lookup_name("foo");
>
oh my, how could I oversight that... damn!!! my bad!!!
>> Anyway - it's just an attempt ;) we always could drop it far-far away ;)
>
> I think that using KSYM_NAME_LEN would be a nice cleanup for xmon, but it
> is for the powerpc guys to decide if they want to do it. I just wanted to
> point the change in behavior so that it wouldn't go unnoticed.
thanks, it's really important
>
> For all we know, the stack may at that point be close to full and an extra
> 64 bytes may tip it over the edge.
>
oops, thanks for pointing out
>>> This also introduces a change in behavior. It is still a nice cleanup,
>>> though. So, if the powerpc people feel they can spare an extra 64 bytes
>>> of stack here, I guess it's ok.
>> Thanks a lot for review Paulo!
>
> No problem. I always keep an eye out for kallsyms related stuff.
;)
>
> --
> Paulo Marques - www.grupopie.com
>
> "There cannot be a crisis today; my schedule is already full."
>
- Cyrill -
--
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