On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 10:38:19AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>>>> Here's what I did for i386 for someone concerned about blowing the
>>>> stack.
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 10:45:10AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>>> Add checks to __pa() so it goes BUG() on vmallocspace addresses.
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 20:52:42 +0200 Andi Kleen <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Sorry I think that's too costly to do. __pa is pretty common
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 08:20:59PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> But not too costly to do if it is done solely with vmalloc the stack
> for
> debug purposes. The bigger problem with the vmalloc approach is there
> are
> still offenders who DMA off the kernel stack on i386 although I'd hope
> they are all ancient... we'll find out with this anyway
Sorry about the email address switch. This is actually work-related.
The stack vmalloc() and __pa() patches were partially intended to catch
or otherwise deliberately break such offenders and go BUG() on them. The
__pa() check in particular is exclusively for the purpose of catching
them. The primary motive being the stack vmalloc() patches remained, of
course, establishing a guard page to trap stack overflows.
-- wli
-
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]
