Re: Potential bug in fs/binfmt_elf.c?
From: John Reiser (jreiser_at_BitWagon.com)
Date: 03/05/04
- Previous message: Danny ter Haar: "Re: server migration"
- In reply to: Mike Hearn: "Potential bug in fs/binfmt_elf.c?"
- Next in thread: Ulrich Drepper: "Re: Potential bug in fs/binfmt_elf.c?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 10:28:07 -0800 To: mike@navi.cx
> When mapping a nobits PT_LOAD segment with a memsize > filesize, the
> kernel calls set_brk (which in turns calls do_brk) to map and clear the
> area, but this discards access permissons on the mapping leading to rwx
> protection. This causes a load failure on systems where the VM cannot
> reserve swap space for the segment, unless overcommit is active (on many
> systems it's not on by default).
[snip]
I believe that's not the only problem with binfmt_elf. If the total address
space described by the PT_LOADs is not exactly one contiguous interval, then
2.6.3 binfmt_elf fills in the gaps with 'prw.' of zero-filled pages, instead
of the intended "holes" with no mapping at all between isolated PT_LOADs.
One example is https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115913
-- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: Danny ter Haar: "Re: server migration"
- In reply to: Mike Hearn: "Potential bug in fs/binfmt_elf.c?"
- Next in thread: Ulrich Drepper: "Re: Potential bug in fs/binfmt_elf.c?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
