lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Mar]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: vvar, gup && coredump
On 03/13, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
>
> On Thursday, March 12 2015, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > And it seems that we all agree that the kernel should not dump this vma
> > too. Could you confirm that this is fine from gdb pov just in case?
>
> Yes, this is what we expect from the GDB side. This mapping is marked
> as "dd", so it does not make sense to dump it.

OK.

> While I have you guys, would it be possible for the Linux kernel to
> include a new flag on VmFlags to uniquely identify an anonymous mapping?

Note that "anonymous" is not the right term here... I mean it is a bit
confusing. Lets discuss this again on debug-list, then we will see if
gdb needs more info from kernel.

> Currently, there is no easy way to do that from userspace. My patch
> implements the following heuristic on GDB:
>
> if (pathname == "/dev/zero (deleted)"
> || pathname == "/SYSV%08x (deleted)"
> || pathname == "<file> (deleted)"

And for example, this is not anonymous mapping. But,

> mapping is anonymous;

I agree, gdb should treat it as anonymous.

> However, this can be fragile. The Linux kernel checks for i_nlink == 0,

Yes, as we already disccussed, I think the kernel should be changed.

It should do something like shmem_mapping() || d_unlinked(), I think.
But this needs another discussion on lkml, and in another thread.

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-03-13 16:21    [W:0.050 / U:1.428 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site