| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAAHN_R1LyhSJE5bAisx39sOyFfRTXQGpCx=CrwQYHWZHSTnOcw@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 22:05:41 +0530 From: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh.poyarekar@...il.com> To: Jan Glauber <jan.glauber@...il.com> Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Ambigiuous thread stack annotation in /proc/pid/[s]maps On 26 June 2013 17:13, Jan Glauber <jan.glauber@...il.com> wrote: > Any ideas how that can be fixed? The only solution that comes to my mind > is to prevent merging vma's that are used for thread stacks. There is already a > flag (MAP_STACK) which is set by the libc for mmap'ing thread stacks but the > kernel currently does not care. If the kernel gets an mmap request with > MAP_STACK set we could mark the VMA and avoid merging it with others. > > Unfortunately there seems to be no bit left in the vm_flags to store the > MAP_STACK information... The annotations essentially point out that the vma contains the stack and not that the vma *is* the stack. We'd get similar output with makecontext/getcontext, where the stack may just be a portion of memory in another vma. I don't remember if I had explicitly mentioned that during the original discussion. Siddhesh -- http://siddhesh.in -- 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