Re: [PATCH v3 09/19] unwind: Introduce sframe user space unwinding

[Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2024 17:21:18 -0500
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:

> > diff --git a/fs/binfmt_elf.c b/fs/binfmt_elf.c
> > index 434c548f0837..64cc3c1188ca 100644
> > --- a/fs/binfmt_elf.c
> > +++ b/fs/binfmt_elf.c
> > @@ -842,7 +842,8 @@ static int load_elf_binary(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
> >  	int first_pt_load = 1;
> >  	unsigned long error;
> >  	struct elf_phdr *elf_ppnt, *elf_phdata, *interp_elf_phdata = NULL;
> > -	struct elf_phdr *elf_property_phdata = NULL, *sframe_phdr = NULL;
> > +	struct elf_phdr *elf_property_phdata = NULL;
> > +	unsigned long sframe_vaddr = 0;  
> 
> Could not just save the pointer to the sframe phd, as it gets freed before we need it.
                                                ^^^
                                                phdr


> > diff --git a/kernel/unwind/sframe.c b/kernel/unwind/sframe.c
> > index 933e47696e29..ca4ef0b72772 100644
> > --- a/kernel/unwind/sframe.c
> > +++ b/kernel/unwind/sframe.c
> > @@ -73,15 +73,15 @@ static int find_fde(struct sframe_section *sec, unsigned long ip,
> >  		    struct sframe_fde *fde)
> >  {
> >  	struct sframe_fde __user *first, *last, *found = NULL;
> > -	u32 ip_off, func_off_low = 0, func_off_high = -1;
> > +	s32 ip_off, func_off_low = INT_MIN, func_off_high = INT_MAX;  
> 
> The ip_off is a signed it. I wrote a program to dump out the sframe section
                         ^^
                         int


> of files, and I had:
> 
> 	ffffed88: (1020) size:      16 off:     146 num:       2 info: 1 rep:16
> 	ffffed98: (1030) size:     336 off:     154 num:       2 info:17 rep:16
> 	ffffefe1: (1279) size:     113 off:       0 num:       4 info: 0 rep: 0
> 	fffff052: (12ea) size:      54 off:      15 num:       3 info: 0 rep: 0
> 	fffff088: (1320) size:     167 off:      26 num:       3 info: 0 rep: 0
> 	fffff12f: (13c7) size:     167 off:      37 num:       4 info: 0 rep: 0
> 	fffff1d6: (146e) size:     167 off:      52 num:       4 info: 0 rep: 0
> 	fffff27d: (1515) size:      22 off:      67 num:       4 info: 0 rep: 0
> 	fffff293: (152b) size:     141 off:      82 num:       4 info: 0 rep: 0
> 	fffff320: (15b8) size:      81 off:      97 num:       4 info: 0 rep: 0
> 	fffff371: (1609) size:     671 off:     112 num:       4 info: 1 rep: 0
> 	fffff610: (18a8) size:     171 off:     131 num:       4 info: 0 rep: 0
> 
> The above turns was created by a loop of:
            ^^^^^^^^^
            items were

No idea why I typed that :-p


I can't blame jetlag anymore.

-- Steve