Re: [PATCH V6] ARM : unwinder : Prevent data abort due to stack overflow

[Anurag Aggarwal]

>>+               if (*vsp >= (unsigned long *)ctrl->sp_high)
>>+                       return -URC_FAILURE;

I tested the same patch, by adding a printk statement in the above if condition.
The print statement I added came a few times as a part of dmesg log.

I think this proves that such corner cases are being handled by the above code

Regards
Anurag

On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 9:24 AM, Anurag Aggarwal <a.anurag@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>Reviewed-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@xxxxxxx>
>>
>>I can confirm that the kernel "doesn't crash" with this applied, and
>>that backtracing at least partially works.  But this is not really
>>sufficient to demontrate that the now code works better than the old
>>code in corner cases (which is the point of the patch).
>>
>>Can you give details of what additional testing you have, or plan to
>>do?
>
> We saw a data abort in unwinder for one of Samsung Project, during a
> Samsung Automation test case.
> After that I created the initial the patch, and the data abort has not been
> seen till now.
>
> Is it possible for you to give an idea on what other kind of additional testing
> do you have in mind.
>
> Regads
> Anurag
>



-- 
Anurag Aggarwal
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/