[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFxwdftN1KcA=Q26oN_GYWyeuyjmMPs-whxZcmz=-ARPFg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 10:47:56 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] x86/dumpstack: Improve opcodes dumping in the Code: section
On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 1:49 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>
> Make it read the whole buffer of code_bytes size in one go. By default
> use a statically allocated 64 bytes buffer. If "code_bytes=" is supplied
> on the cmdline a new buffer gets allocated.
Are these always serialized? For oopses, I think we end up serializing
with die_lock, but is that always the case?
Maybe at least a comment about why a static allocation is ok?
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists