[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51A5EF47.4080101@asianux.com>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 20:06:31 +0800
From: Chen Gang <gang.chen@...anux.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
CC: Chen Gang <gang.chen@...anux.com>,
Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>,
Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org>,
Richard Kuo <rkuo@...eaurora.org>,
Jesper Nilsson <jesper.nilsson@...s.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
"uclinux-dist-devel@...ckfin.uclinux.org"
<uclinux-dist-devel@...ckfin.uclinux.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch: blackfin: kernel: memory overflow, 'namebuf' length
need be more than 256
On 05/29/2013 07:30 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> void show_regs(struct pt_regs *fp)
>> > {
>> > - char buf[150];
>> > + char buf[512];
> This will increase stack usage a lot. And this function calls decode_address(),
> which allocates another buffer on the stack.
>
Can it have a risk to cause the related stack used up ? (excuse me, I
don't know the system or thread stack size of blackfin).
If so, we really need save some byes (e.g. buf[300] ...), at least. But
I'm not sure whether it still has the risk too.
> However, as this is in debug code which is (never?) called concurrently, both
> buffers can be made static?
>
trap_c() may call show_regs(), and can multiple traps occur at the same
time ?
It seems it can (but I am not quite sure): for trap_c() only use stack
variables, and "cpu = raw_smp_processor_id()".
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Asianux Corporation
--
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