From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-x22f.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::22f]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1aTLLc-0004Gi-8b for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 03:21:45 +0000 Received: by mail-wm0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id p63so9759990wmp.1 for ; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 19:21:23 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 04:21:18 +0100 From: Ivan Delalande Subject: Re: [PATCH] makedumpfile: readpage_elf: handle 0-pages not stored in the ELF file Message-ID: <20160210032118.GI382@ycc.fr> References: <20160122233514.GA25777@ycc.fr> <0910DD04CBD6DE4193FCF86B9C00BE9701E19AFB@BPXM01GP.gisp.nec.co.jp> <20160127085821.3be424e1@hananiah.suse.cz> <20160127103741.0e4fec81@hananiah.suse.cz> <0910DD04CBD6DE4193FCF86B9C00BE9701E1B252@BPXM01GP.gisp.nec.co.jp> <20160201130042.5c83f7ae@hananiah.suse.cz> <0910DD04CBD6DE4193FCF86B9C00BE9701E1B6CE@BPXM01GP.gisp.nec.co.jp> <20160202070044.GN6903@ycc.fr> <20160209093150.35da61c2@hananiah.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160209093150.35da61c2@hananiah.suse.cz> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "kexec" Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: Petr Tesarik Cc: Atsushi Kumagai , "kexec@lists.infradead.org" Hi, On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 09:31:50AM +0100, Petr Tesarik wrote: > On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 08:00:44 +0100 Ivan Delalande wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 06:48:17AM +0000, Atsushi Kumagai wrote: > > > >Anyway, are you going to take the patch by Ivan, or my patch (after I > > > >remove exclude_nodata_pages)? > > > > > > Ivan's patch is necessary to follow the ELF specification, but also > > > your patch (with exclude_nodata_pages) should be merged. > > > The two patches have different approach to expand struct pt_load_segment, > > > hence could you manage both work ? > > > > > > Ivan, your v2 patch has no problems, but could I leave this work to Petr > > > since the two patches touch the same area ? > > > > Sure, this sounds reasonable. > > just a short status update. I haven't forgotten this patch, but I've > had some troubles reproducing the issue. To make sure I'm not on the > wrong track, what happened when you tried to dump dmesg on the affected > dump file without the patch? > > For me, I crafted a dump file which causes a segfault. Did makedumpfile > also terminate on SIGSEGV? Did it report an error? Or did it just > produce wrong output? Yeah, just a segfault, without any other message or output. It was coming from readpage_elf, at the call to memset in the `if (!offset1)` block, as it thinks it is handling one of this weird overlapping segments from ia64 and computes bad offsets. Thank you, -- Ivan "Colona" Delalande Arista Networks _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec