From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.windriver.com (mail1.windriver.com [147.11.146.13]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9EAE6F8EE for ; Tue, 3 Jun 2014 09:19:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com [147.11.189.40]) by mail1.windriver.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s539JiVm013466 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 3 Jun 2014 02:19:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.224.162.187] (128.224.162.187) by ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.169.1; Tue, 3 Jun 2014 02:19:43 -0700 Message-ID: <538D9363.2020006@windriver.com> Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 17:20:35 +0800 From: ChenQi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Purdie References: <1401786411.12440.54.camel@ted> In-Reply-To: <1401786411.12440.54.camel@ted> X-Originating-IP: [128.224.162.187] Cc: matt.cowell@nsn.com, openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [daisy][PATCH 1/1] systemd: do not use alloca() function in case of uclibc X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 09:19:51 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 06/03/2014 05:06 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Tue, 2014-06-03 at 15:42 +0800, Chen Qi wrote: >> The alloca() function allocates space in the stack frame of the caller, >> so using alloca(new_size - old_size) would possibly crash the stack, >> causing a segment fault error. >> >> This patch fixes the above problem by avoiding using this function in >> journal-file.c. >> >> [YOCTO #6201] >> >> Signed-off-by: Chen Qi >> --- >> .../0001-journal-file.c-do-not-use-alloca.patch | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++ >> meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd_211.bb | 1 + >> 2 files changed, 55 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd/0001-journal-file.c-do-not-use-alloca.patch >> >> diff --git a/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd/0001-journal-file.c-do-not-use-alloca.patch b/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd/0001-journal-file.c-do-not-use-alloca.patch >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..a638d58 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd/0001-journal-file.c-do-not-use-alloca.patch >> @@ -0,0 +1,54 @@ >> +Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [oe specific] > >From the description, this sounds like an allocation error which can > happen *anywhere* and is a problem that should be addressed upstream. > > This Upstream-Status field is therefore completely bogus. Its not > inappropriate or oe specific. If you still believe it is, I'd like to > hear more explanation. > > The abuses of this field are starting to really annoy me since this > keeps happening. > > Cheers, > > Richard > > > > > Hi Richard, The use of alloca() was introduced by an oe-specific patch from Khem Raj. The patch is meta/recipes-core/systemd/systemd/systemd-pam-fix-fallocate.patch. The upstream status of the above patch is as following. Upstream-Status: Denied [no desire for uclibc support] That's why I use 'Inappropriate [oe specific]' in the Upstream-Status field of my patch. And I just realized I forgot to also patch the journald-kmsg.c file. I'll send out a V2. Best Regards, Chen Qi