lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/4] coredump: core dump masking support v3
Hi,

Markus Gutschke wrote:

> Kawai, Hidehiro wrote:
>
>> This patch series is version 3 of the core dump masking feature,
>> which provides a per-process flag not to dump anonymous shared
>> memory segments.
>
> I just wanted to remind you that you need to be careful about dumping
> the [vdso] segment no matter whether you omit other segments. I didn't
> actually try running your patches, and if the kernel doesn't actually
> consider this segment anonymous and shared, things might already work
> fine as is.

Thank you for your advice and sorry for not replying soon.

Fortunately, the latest kernel uses VM_ALWAYSDUMP flag to always dump
the vdso segment. My patchset doesn't change this behavior. So we
don't need to worry about the vdso segment.


> As an alternative to your kernel patch, you could achieve the same goal
> in user space, by linking my coredumper
> http://code.google.com/p/google-coredumper/ into your binaries and
> setting up appropriate signal handlers. An equivalent patch for
> selectively omitting memory regions would be trivial to add.

As far as I can see, google-coredumper has more flexibility.
Can google-coredumper satisfy the following requirements easily?

Requirements are:
(1) a user can change the core dump settings _anytime_
- sometimes want to dump anonymous shared memory segments and
sometimes don't want to dump them
(2) a user can change the core dump settings of _any processes_
(although permission checks are performed)
- in a huge application which forks many processes, a user
hopes that some processes dump anonymous shared memory
segments and some processes don't dump them

And reliability of the core dump feature is also important.


> While this
> does give you more flexibility, it of course has the drawback of
> requiring you to change your applications, so there still is some
> benefit in a kernelspace solution.

And all the software vendors don't necessarily apply
google-coredumper. If the vendor doesn't apply it, the user will
be bothered by huge core dumps or the buggy application which
remains unfixed. So I believe that in kernel solution is still
needed.

Thanks,
--
Hidehiro Kawai
Hitachi, Ltd., Systems Development Laboratory

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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-03-01 13:39    [W:0.123 / U:0.124 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site