Re: reliable reproducer, was Re: core dump analysis
Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.debian.ports.68k |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAMuHMdUo-qDuX7ob9iBuALZnLetgdS5c59cZ7Q-47QvrUcsM7Q@mail.gmail.com> |
Hi Finn, On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 12:53 PM Finn Thain <[email protected]> wrote: > Inspired by your observation about the page fault and stack growth, I > wrote a small test program (given below) that just pushes registers onto > the stack recursively while forking processes and collecting the SIGCHLD > signals. > > On a Motorola '030 the stack grows to about 7 MiB before it gets > corrupted. The program detects the stack corruption and terminates > immediately with an illegal instruction. Oddly, the program never detects > any stack corruption when run on the QEMU '040. Nice! (the reproducer, not the bug ;-) Does it also fail on a very old kernel image you still have lying around? Just to rule out a recent kernel bug. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected] In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds