linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 5/6] powerpc: Add show_user

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20180810180800.GB30475@kermit-br-ibm-com>
Date:   Fri, 10 Aug 2018 15:08:00 -0300
From:   Murilo Opsfelder Araujo <muriloo@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Christophe LEROY <christophe.leroy@....fr>
Cc:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Michael Neuling <mikey@...ling.org>,
        Simon Guo <wei.guo.simon@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnellan@....ibm.com>,
        "Alastair D'Silva" <alastair@...ilva.org>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, Cyril Bur <cyrilbur@...il.com>,
        "Tobin C . Harding" <me@...in.cc>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/6] powerpc: Add show_user_instructions()

Hi, Christophe.

On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 11:29:43AM +0200, Christophe LEROY wrote:
>
>
> Le 03/08/2018 à 13:31, Murilo Opsfelder Araujo a écrit :
> > Hi, everyone.
> >
> > I'd like to thank you all that contributed to refining and making this
> > series better.  I did appreciate.
> >
> > Thank you!
>
> You are welcome.
>
> It seems that nested segfaults don't print very well. The code line is split
> in two, le second half being alone on one line. Any way to avoid that ?

What do you mean by "nested segfaults"?  I'd guess it's related to nested
virtualization, e.g.: host (kvm hv) -> guest1 (kvm pr) -> guest2?  So the
segfault would have been originated in guest2?

Can you provide us with more details about how to reproduce that?

Anyway, is "XXXXXXXX" so important that it needs to be printed at all?  Can't we
just discard it and not print it?

Murilo