[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 03:04:38 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regset: use vmalloc() for regset_get_alloc()
On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 06:54:51PM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > What the hell? Which regset could have lead to that?
> > It would need to have the total size of register in excess of
> > 256K. Seriously, which regset is that about? Note that we
> > have just made sure that size is not greater than that product.
> > size is unsigned int, so it's not as if a negative value passed
> > to function could get through that test only to be interpreted
> > as large positive later...
> >
> > Details, please.
>
> I can continue to dig more, but it is easy for me to reproduce this.
> On the stack is elf_core_dump() and it seems like we're getting a core
> dump of the chrome process. So I just arbitrarily look for the chrome
> GPU process:
>
> $ ps aux | grep gpu-process
> chronos 2075 3.0 1.1 34075552 95372 ? S<l 18:44 0:01
> /opt/google/chrome/chrome --type=gpu-process ...
>
> Then I send it a quit:
>
> $ kill -quit 2075
>
> I added some printouts for this allocation and there are a ton. Here's
> all of them, some of which are over 256K:
Well, the next step would be to see which regset it is - if you
see that kind of allocation, print regset->n, regset->size and
regset->core_note_type.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists