linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] ptrace: add generic SET

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <1472197.o98pKNTkBz@wuerfel>
Date:	Thu, 13 Nov 2014 23:25:29 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Ulrich Weigand <Ulrich.Weigand@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Andreas Krebbel1 <Andreas.Krebbel@...ibm.com>,
	"keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
	linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
	"linux@....linux.org.uk" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	"roland@...k.frob.com" <roland@...k.frob.com>,
	AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] ptrace: add generic SET_SYSCALL request

On Thursday 13 November 2014 15:49:20 Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote on 13.11.2014 11:21:28:
> 
> > I have to admit that I don't really understand gdb internals, but from
> > a first look I get the impression that it will just do the right thing
> > if you reuse NT_S390_SYSTEM_CALL on ARM64 with the same semantics.
> 
> There's an interface between BFD and GDB proper involved here.  BFD will
> detect the presence of register set notes in the core dump, and will
> translate them into virtual sections; GDB will then simply look up such
> sections under well-known names.
> 
> In particular, the NT_S390_SYSTEM_CALL note will be translated by BFD
> into a virtual section named ".reg-s390-system-call"; GDB platform-
> specific code will look for sections of this particular name.
> 
> So if you were to create notes using the same note type, by default it
> would do nothing on ARM64.  You might add code to the ARM64 back-end
> to also look for a section ".reg-s390-system-call", but that would be
> somewhat confusing.  Using a new, platform-specific note type for ARM64
> would appear to fit better with existing precedent.

Ok, thanks a lot for your insight and for confirming what Takahiro AKASHI
said. Let's use a new NT_ARM64_SYSTEM_CALL type with a different
number then.

	Arnd
--
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/