Hi, qiwu
Thank you for the update.
On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 11:52 AM <devel-requ...@lists.crash-utility.osci.io>
wrote:
> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2024 11:38:27 -0000
> From: qiwu.c...@transsion.com
> Subject: [Crash-utility] Re: [PATCH] arm64: fix a potential segfault
> in arm64_unwind_frame
> To: devel@lists.crash-utility.osci.io
> Message-ID: <20240714113827.21739.63...@lists.crash-utility.osci.io>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Sorry, the patch in previous mail. is mistake Please help review the below
> patch which is test fine:
> diff --git a/arm64.c b/arm64.c
> index b3040d7..b992c01 100644
> --- a/arm64.c
> +++ b/arm64.c
> @@ -2814,7 +2814,7 @@ arm64_unwind_frame(struct bt_info *bt, struct
> arm64_stackframe
> *frame)
> low = frame->sp;
> high = (low + stack_mask) & ~(stack_mask);
>
> - if (fp < low || fp > high || fp & 0xf)
> + if (fp < low || fp > high || fp & 0xf || !INSTACK(fp, bt))
> return FALSE;
>
>
I saw the similar code is in the arm64_unwind_frame_v2(), can you help to
check if the current issue can be reproduced with bt -o/-O(although the
-o/-O may be used in some old vmores)? Or we need to do the same change in
the arm64_unwind_frame_v2().
BTW: I can not reproduce the current issue, can you help share how to
reproduce this one(if possible)?
Thanks
Lianbo
frame->sp = fp + 0x10;
>
> Thanks
>
>
--
Crash-utility mailing list -- devel@lists.crash-utility.osci.io
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.crash-utility.osci.io
https://${domain_name}/admin/lists/devel.lists.crash-utility.osci.io/
Contribution Guidelines: https://github.com/crash-utility/crash/wiki
