linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] fault while using perf callchains in sparc64

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Mon, 29 Mar 2010 15:32:08 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	fweisbec@...il.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] fault while using perf callchains in sparc64

From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:21:34 +0200

> $ ldd /usr/bin/as
> 	libopcodes-2.18.0.20080103.so => /usr/lib/libopcodes-2.18.0.20080103.so (0xf7ec4000)
> 	libbfd-2.18.0.20080103.so => /usr/lib/libbfd-2.18.0.20080103.so (0xf7e14000)
> 	libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xf7ca0000)
> 	/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xf7efc000)

Ok, same here.

> The last kernel I know that don't have such problems is 2.6.31-rc6
> May be I should bisect?

Hmmm, since you know a good and bad point, yes a bisect
might be the best way to proceed here.

It might be quicker if you first test 2.6.32 and 2.6.33
and then use the results of that to guide your bisect.

Anyways, if you narrow it down to a commit I should be
able to fix this quickly.

Thanks!
--
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/