| 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: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 03:01:35 -0500 From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com> To: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh.poyarekar@...il.com> Cc: Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>, linux-man@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH] Mark thread stack correctly in proc/<pid>/maps > Right now MAP_STACK does not mean anything since it is ignored. The > intention of this behaviour change is to make MAP_STACK mean that the > map is going to be used as a stack and hence, set it up like a stack > ought to be. I could not really think of a valid case for fixed size > stacks; it looks like a limitation in the pthread implementation in > glibc rather than a feature. So this patch will actually result in > uniform behaviour across threads when it comes to stacks. > > This does change vm accounting since thread stacks were earlier > accounted as anon memory. The fact is, now process stack and pthread stack clearly behave different dance. libc don't expect pthread stack grow automatically. So, your patch will break userland. Just only change display thing. -- 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