Steven Rostedt wrote on Sat, Dec 02, 2023 at 11:15:24PM -0500:
> > Also, for custom tracepoints e.g. bpftrace the program needs to know how
> > many bytes can be read safely even if it's just for dumping -- unless
> > dynamic_array is a "fat pointer" that conveys its own size?
> > (Sorry didn't
On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 10:33:32 +0900
Dominique Martinet wrote:
> > TP_printk("clnt %lu %s(tag = %d)\n%.3x: %16ph\n%.3x: %16ph\n",
> > (unsigned long)__entry->clnt,
> > show_9p_op(__entry->type),
> > __entry->tag, 0,
Steven Rostedt wrote on Sat, Dec 02, 2023 at 08:14:09PM -0500:
> > AFAICS __entry is a local variable on stack, and array __entry->line not
> > intialized with zeros, i.e. the dump would contain trash at the end. Maybe
> > prepending memset() before memcpy()?
Well spotted!
Now I'm thinking about
On Sat, 02 Dec 2023 14:05:24 +0100
Christian Schoenebeck wrote:
> > > --- a/include/trace/events/9p.h
> > > +++ b/include/trace/events/9p.h
> > > @@ -185,7 +185,8 @@ TRACE_EVENT(9p_protocol_dump,
> > > __entry->clnt = clnt;
> > > __entry->type = pdu->id;
> > >
On 12/2/2023 1:26 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
On Sat, 2 Dec 2023 at 09:49, Justin Chen wrote:
On 12/1/23 10:53 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 at 23:59, Justin Chen wrote:
On 12/1/23 10:07 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 09:25:59 -0800
Justin Chen wrote:
On Saturday, December 2, 2023 5:35:18 AM CET asmad...@codewreck.org wrote:
> JP Kobryn wrote on Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 07:04:10PM -0800:
> > An out of bounds read can occur within the tracepoint 9p_protocol_dump().
> > In the fast assign, there is a memcpy that uses a constant size of 32
> > (macro
On Sat, 2 Dec 2023 at 09:49, Justin Chen wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12/1/23 10:53 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 at 23:59, Justin Chen wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 12/1/23 10:07 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 09:25:59 -0800
> >>> Justin Chen wrote:
> >>>
> > It
On 12/1/23 10:53 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 at 23:59, Justin Chen wrote:
On 12/1/23 10:07 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 09:25:59 -0800
Justin Chen wrote:
It appears the sub instruction at 0x6dd0 correctly accounts for the
extra 8 bytes, so the frame
