lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: *(int *)0 = 0
Hi Timur.

>>> What is the effect of the following statement at the end of a
>>> function definition?
>>>
>>> *(int *)0 = 0;

>> That should throw a segmentation fault, in the kernel an OOPS, in
>> this statement the code is trying to dereference a NULL pointer and
>> store a value at 0x0.

> A much smarter way to do this would be to use this code:

> static inline void int3(void) { __asm__ __volatile__ (".byte 0xCC\n"); };

> Granted, it's x86-specific, but it works better, since gdb will halt
> the code right at that spot rather than inside some trap hander.
> And it's just more elegant.

As I understand it, there's two problems with your suggestion:

1. The fact that it's x86-specific would rule it out as part of
the actual code of most functions, as they are designed to
work on any of the supported processors without change.

However, this can be dealt with by using a macro function and
dropping the macro definition in an arch-specific header file.

2. The code isn't normally designed for what gdb does with it,
but for what it does when run on its own. I believe that the
original results in an error message being thrown up on the
screen, but I suspect your replacement would just halt the
processor and make the user think Linux had crashed.

Comments, anybody?

Best wishes from Riley.

-
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: 2005-03-22 13:08    [W:0.042 / U:5.856 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site