[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52B9AF0A.3030806@hitachi.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2013 00:58:02 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
To: Jovi Zhangwei <jovi.zhangwei@...il.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Sandeepa Prabhu <sandeepa.prabhu@...aro.org>, x86@...nel.org,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, systemtap@...rceware.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip v6 06/22] [BUGFIX] x86: Prohibit probing on memcpy/memset
(2013/12/24 18:53), Jovi Zhangwei wrote:
>>> Still no crash, use your kernel config.
>>> memcpy and __memcpy have same address in /proc/kallsyms.
>>>
>>> Looks like a interesting problem.
>>
>> Agreed. In my case, those have same address, but only probing
>> __memcpy caused a kernel crash. I'm not sure why, but it is
>> safe to disable probing on it.
>>
> Shall we need dig further to address the root cause? IMO, the kprobe
> should act same behavior when given same probe address, but it's look
> so weird in your box. :)
Hmm, right now, I tried it again and found the bug disappeared...
I'm using the latest tip kernel for the test;
3ab838d7723e9fbfd49b2d395752bd68e1ef4b71
Should I remove this patch until it happens again?
Thank you,
--
Masami HIRAMATSU
IT Management Research Dept. Linux Technology Center
Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory
E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com
--
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