[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d5b1ed3c-85d4-a3f1-759f-ad6296ab30bf@nod.at>
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 14:20:22 +0100
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
vbabka@...e.cz, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
jmarchan@...hat.com, gerald.schaefer@...ibm.com,
hannes@...xchg.org, luto@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: Fix integer overflow of VmLib
Michal,
Am 05.01.2017 um 12:49 schrieb Michal Hocko:
>> I thought 0 is the better choice since it will not lead to wrong results
>> when userspace tools compute the sum of values reported by /proc/<pid>/status.
>
> Dunno. If somebody translates 0 to statically linked library then it
> could be wrong.
Checking VmLib for 0 is not the correct way to detect a statically linked
program.
Unless I misread the code, VmLib will honour any PROT_EXEC mapping.
So, a statically linked JIT will have VmLib > 0.
Thanks,
//richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists