linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] perf tools: unwind: ensure unwind hooks return negative errorno.

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: <20150401121222.GA10820@krava.brq.redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:12:22 +0200
From:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:	Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>
Cc:	acme@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, namhyung@...nel.org,
	mingo@...hat.com, lizefan@...wei.com, pi3orama@....com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] perf tools: unwind: ensure unwind hooks return
 negative errorno.

On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 10:33:12AM +0000, Wang Nan wrote:
> According to man pages of libunwind, unwind hooks should return
> 'negative value of one of the unw_error_t error-codes', they are
> different from generic error code. In addition, access_dso_mem()
> returns '!(size == sizeof(*data))', compiler never ensure it is
> negative when failure, which causes libunwind get undesire value
> when accessing //anon memory.
> 
> This patch fixes this problem by force returning negative value when
> error, instead of returning 'ret' itself when it is non-zero.

hum, how about find_proc_info callback.. should it follow the same rules?

thanks,
jirka
--
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/