linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] stacktrace: add save_stack_trace_tsk

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: <20150217161320.fb3da954106ad44e9f07ca9e@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:13:20 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
	Seth Jennings <sjenning@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] stacktrace: add save_stack_trace_tsk_safe()

On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 12:52:35 -0600 Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:

> It isn't possible to get the stack of a running task (other than
> current) because we don't have the stack pointer and the stack can be
> inconsistent anyway.  Add a safe stack saving facility which only saves
> the stack of the task if it's sleeping or if it's the current task.

Can you send the task an IPI and get it to save its stack for you? 

There's probably some (messy, arch-dependent) way of trimming away the
interrupt-related stuff off the stack, if that's really needed.


--
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/