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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2010 15:26:05 -0600 From: "Steven J. Magnani" <steve@...idescorp.com> To: Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org> Cc: monstr@...str.eu, microblaze-uclinux@...e.uq.edu.au, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] microblaze: Support FRAME_POINTER for better backtrace Paul - On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 10:43 +0900, Paul Mundt wrote: > This doesn't look that bad compared to what some of the other > architectures have to deal with. If the frame pointer is always setup > using these addik/swi pairs then you can trivially scan an arbitrary > number of instructions attempting to match before giving up. We do > similar things for sh64 where we also have to figure out how stack frames > were created in order to roll them back. > > In any event, take a look at arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh5/unwind.c, you should > be able to use a similar scheme without the need for undue complexity. > Thanks for the tip. This looks manageable. I had thought to search for instructions that create frames but didn't think working backwards from return addresses was a good idea. Using kallsyms to get the "top" of each function is a nice way around that. Regards, ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Steven J. Magnani "I claim this network for MARS! www.digidescorp.com Earthling, return my space modulator!" #include <standard.disclaimer> -- 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