linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] scripts: add script for translating stack dump function

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]

Date:   Mon, 19 Sep 2016 14:28:59 -0500
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
        Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>,
        Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] scripts: add script for translating stack dump
 function

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 12:15:42PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> The only working (and fast) approach I could come up with was an ugly
> >> hack.  It assumes that start_kernel() is in init/main.c.
> >
> > That sounds entirely reasonable. Maybe somebody can come up with a
> > better and more general approach, but that sounds like a fine starting
> > point, and any incremental improvents can happen in the tree. So I'll
> > apply your patch (assuming it passes my basic testing, which I expect
> > it will).
> 
> Hmm. Would you mind if I change the
> 
>         addr2line -fpie $objfile $hexaddr | sed "s;$dir_prefix;;"
> 
> into
> 
>         addr2line -fpie $objfile $hexaddr |
>                 sed "s; at $dir_prefix\(\./\)*; at ;"
> 
> instead? There's two changes there: matching the " at " part (to just
> make the match stricter) but also matching any following "./" thing
> (which shows up for our include tree files, at least for me).
> 
> With that, all the cases I threw at it looked pretty good.
> 
> But the stricter matching might not matter, of course, and maybe there
> is some addr2line version that doesn't do that? So I'm checking here..

For some reason, I don't see the "./" for my include files.  But
regardless, your changes look good to me.

-- 
Josh