linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf report: fix off-by-one for non-activation frames

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: <20170516015753.GB4885@sejong>
Date:   Tue, 16 May 2017 10:57:53 +0900
From:   Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To:     Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@...b.com>
Cc:     Linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
        Yao Jin <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>, kernel-team@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf report: fix off-by-one for non-activation frames

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 05:13:06PM +0200, Milian Wolff wrote:
> On Monday, May 15, 2017 5:04:44 PM CEST Milian Wolff wrote:
> > As the documentation for dwfl_frame_pc says, frames that
> > are no activation frames need to have their program counter
> > decremented by one to properly find the function of the caller.
> 
> Note that this leaves the perf build against libunwind in the current, broken 
> state. I do not know how to detect the activation property there. Does anyone 
> else? See elfutils source code for what it is doing:
> 
> https://sourceware.org/git/?p=elfutils.git;a=blob;f=libdwfl/
> dwfl_frame_pc.c;h=296c815b9c73f42d79ac1778d2a0c420b89ee4eb;hb=HEAD

It seems that you can use unw_is_signal_frame().

Thanks,
Namhyung