linux-kernel - Re: [patch 2/2] procfs: provide stack information for threads V0.8

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]

Message-Id: <1245136451.17989.12.camel@wall-e>
Date:	Tue, 16 Jun 2009 09:14:11 +0200
From:	Stefani Seibold <stefani@...bold.net>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] procfs: provide stack information for threads V0.8

Am Montag, den 15.06.2009, 15:01 -0700 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> > ...
> >
> > --- linux-2.6.30.orig/include/linux/sched.h	2009-06-04 09:29:47.000000000 +0200
> > +++ linux-2.6.30/include/linux/sched.h	2009-06-04 09:32:35.000000000 +0200
> > @@ -1429,6 +1429,7 @@
> >  	/* state flags for use by tracers */
> >  	unsigned long trace;
> >  #endif
> > +	unsigned long stack_start;
> >  };
> >  
> 
> A `stack_start' in the task_struct.  This is a bit confusing - we
> already have a `void *stack' in there.  Perhaps this should be named
> user_stack_start or something?
> 
> 
IMHO i think the void *stack is also a to general name, it should be
name kernel_stack or thread_info.

In real we have two stack, so the name user_stack and kernel_stack would
be my favor.

I have examined the source and and task_struct void *stack would be used
in about 10 files.
 


--
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/