On 28 Feb 2015 23:09, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 02:38:45PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On 28 Feb 2015 18:40, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 01:06:22AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > vFAIL: test; s390/32-bit/MSB linux-3.18.1 kernel-headers-3.16.0
> > > > glibc-2.19 gcc-4.8.3
> > > > FAIL: pc.test
> > > > 00400000-00401000 r-xp 00000000 5e:05 17513 /home/vapier/strace/tests/pc
> > > > 00401000-00402000 r--p 00000000 5e:05 17513 /home/vapier/strace/tests/pc
> > > > [pid 24037] [fd4eaa6e] munmap(0x400000, 8192) = 0
> > > > [pid 24037] [80400702] --- SIGSEGV {si_signo=SIGSEGV,
> > > > si_code=SEGV_MAPERR, si_addr=0x400000} ---
> > >
> > > > vFAIL: test; s390x/64-bit/MSB linux-3.18.1 kernel-headers-3.16.0
> > > > glibc-2.19 gcc-4.8.3
> > > > 80000000-80001000 r-xp 00000000 5e:05 28901 /home/vapier/strace/tests/pc
> > > > 80001000-80002000 r--p 00000000 5e:05 28901 /home/vapier/strace/tests/pc
> > > > [pid 17223] [000003fffd1cf31a] munmap(0x80000000, 8192) = 0
> > > > [pid 17223] [00000000800008f4] --- SIGSEGV {si_signo=SIGSEGV,
> > > > si_code=SEGV_MAPERR, si_addr=0x80000000} ---
> > >
> > > On all other architectures we tested si_addr matches instruction pointer.
> > > Could it be an s390/s390x kernel bug in SIGSEGV SEGV_MAPERR reporting?
> >
> > that does look like the case. this change to the kernel lets the test pass:
> >
> > --- a/arch/s390/mm/fault.c
> > +++ b/arch/s390/mm/fault.c
> > @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@
> > report_user_fault(regs, SIGSEGV);
> > si.si_signo = SIGSEGV;
> > si.si_code = si_code;
> > - si.si_addr = (void __user *)(regs->int_parm_long & __FAIL_ADDR_MASK);
> > + si.si_addr = (void __user *)regs->psw.addr;
> > force_sig_info(SIGSEGV, &si, current);
> > }
>
> Thanks. __FAIL_ADDR_MASK certainly shouldn't be applied in this case,
> passing unmodified regs->int_parm_long will fix s390x. Not sure about
> replacing int_parm_long with psw.addr -- it would surely make the test
> pass, but whether strace is correct in printing unmodified psw.addr as
> instruction pointer on s390?
yeah, i noticed the nuances between data & insn based crashes when putting
together a test case. posted here:
https://marc.info/?l=linux-s390&m=142515870124248&w=2
i guess we just ignore the failure on s390/s390x and let upstream sort it out.
-mike
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
_______________________________________________ Strace-devel mailing list Strace-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/strace-devel
