On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> If you need even more in your code (I assume you do otherwise you wouldn't
> have done the work) then I really suggest you take a long hard look and fix
> the obvious bugs or the design....
Arjan, I completely agree with you, but please do not overlook one obvious
thing -- sometimes (well, most of the time) in order to fix those stack
corruption issues you _first_ need to apply this patch and then it becomes
obvious that the reason for this "random" corruption is the stack
overflow. A kernel panic is not shouting like "I am a stack overflow!"
(yes, I know of Andrea's IKD of course, but sometimes it is preferrable to
apply a small non-intrusive patch instead)
So, I found this patch useful at least for debugging. Moreover, I think it
would be very useful to have it in Linus' kernel as a CONFIG_ option so
that if people complain about random memory corruption then they can try
to reproduce it with larger stack and then (with aid of /proc/stack) the
offender is found and fixed. I cc'd Alan; if he thinks this is a bad idea
I would be interested to know why.
Regards,
Tigran
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 15 2002 - 21:00:19 EST