[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4928B72D.20901@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 09:51:41 +0800
From: jia zhang <jia.zhang2008@...il.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
CC: tglx@...utronix.de, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, hpa@...or.com
Subject: [PATCH] x86_64: fix the check point in stack_overflow_check
stack_overflow_check() should consider the stack usage of pt_regs, and thus it could warn us in advance. Additionally, it looks a bit good that the warning time starts at INITIAL_JIFFIES.
Signed-off-by: jia zhang <jia.zhang2008@...il.com>
---
Assume at the moment rsp get close to the check point before interrupt arrives.
When interrupt really happens, thread_info will be partly overrode.
arch/x86/kernel/irq_64.c | 7 ++++---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/irq_64.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/irq_64.c
@@ -29,11 +29,12 @@
static inline void stack_overflow_check(struct pt_regs *regs)
{
u64 curbase = (u64)task_stack_page(current);
- static unsigned long warned = -60*HZ;
+ static unsigned long warned = INITIAL_JIFFIES - 60*HZ;
if (regs->sp >= curbase && regs->sp <= curbase + THREAD_SIZE &&
- regs->sp < curbase + sizeof(struct thread_info) + 128 &&
- time_after(jiffies, warned + 60*HZ)) {
+ regs->sp < curbase + sizeof(struct thread_info) +
+ sizeof(struct pt_regs) + 128 &&
+ time_after(jiffies, warned + 60*HZ)) {
printk("do_IRQ: %s near stack overflow (cur:%Lx,sp:%lx)\n",
current->comm, curbase, regs->sp);
show_stack(NULL,NULL);
--
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