Re: [PATCH 1/2] alpha/ptrace: Record and handle the absence of switch_stack
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: 2021-06-21 02:18:29
Also in:
linux-alpha, linux-m68k, lkml
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2021-06-16 · Re: [PATCH 1/2] alpha/ptrace: Record and handle the absence of switch_stack · Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
- 2021-06-16 · Re: [PATCH 1/2] alpha/ptrace: Record and handle the absence of switch_stack · Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
- 2021-06-16 · Re: [PATCH 1/2] alpha/ptrace: Record and handle the absence of switch_stack · Eric W. Biederman <hidden>
- 2021-06-16 · Re: [PATCH 1/2] alpha/ptrace: Record and handle the absence of switch_stack · Eric W. Biederman <hidden>
On Sun, Jun 20, 2021 at 7:01 PM Michael Schmitz [off-list ref] wrote:
instrumenting get_reg on m68k and using a similar patch to yours to warn when unsaved registers are accessed on the switch stack, I get a hit from getegid and getegid32, just by running a simple ptrace on ls. Going to wack those two moles now ...
I don't see what's going on. Those system calls don't use the register
state, afaik. What's the call chain, exactly?
Linus