On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 03:46:21PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > If I understand it well, an application which maps address 0 has no way to
> > be notified that the kernel detected a corrupted stack pointer.
>
> It will just not crash again after the application tried to deliberately
> crash the kernel.
"deliberately" is a bit exagerated here. Failed stack overflows,
hardware memory corruption and various bugs that happen to most
application developpers at early coding stage are not what can be
called "deliberate".
Also, I don't know if memory leak detectors rely on getting a SEGV,
but this patch would make them useless on apps which map addr 0.
> > I agree
> > that if the proposed patch avoids to make this undesired distinction between
> > apps that map addr 0 and those which don't, it would be better to merge it.
> > Andi, you said there was nothing wrong with it, do you accept that it gets
> > merged ?
>
> As I said, it's not wrong, just not necessary.
I understand your point, but I think that covering most situations the
same way helps reducing exceptions, and helps troubleshooting.
> -Andi
Regards,
Willy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
