Menu
▾
▴
Re: [LTP] [PATCH] FIx broken clone02 code
|
From: Robert W. <ro...@us...> - 2003-02-12 19:33:33
|
I actually was just looking at this test this week.....wondering why it seemed to get a SIGSEGV even though it returned pass. Glad to see you figured out the problem here.....applied the patch to the CVS tree. - Robbie Robert V. Williamson <ro...@us...> Linux Test Project IBM Linux Technology Center Phone: (512) 838-9295 T/L: 678-9295 Fax: (512) 838-4603 Web: http://ltp.sourceforge.net IRC: #ltp on freenode.irc.net ==================== "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -Albert Einstein Andi Kleen <ak...@mu...> Sent by: To: ltp...@li... ltp...@li...ur cc: wi...@de... ceforge.net Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] FIx broken clone02 code 02/12/2003 01:12 PM clone expects the new value of the stack register as child_stack argument. On an architecture with up-to-down stack this has to be the end of the stack area. Previously it was passing the beginning. At least when you're not on PA-RISC this patch is correct. On PA-RISC the stack grows up so the old code was correct. For everybody else this change is needed. PA-RISC will need to be separately addressed. On x86-64 it would corrupt enough memory to cause a segfault in free. It is a mistery why it worked on i386 or wherever it was tested. -Andi --- testcases/kernel/syscalls/clone/clone02.c~ 2003-02-12 20:40:00.000000000 +0100 +++ testcases/kernel/syscalls/clone/clone02.c 2003-02-12 20:40:00.000000000 +0100 @@ -179,7 +179,7 @@ } /* Test the system call */ - TEST(clone(child_fn, child_stack, + TEST(clone(child_fn, child_stack + CHILD_STACK_SIZE, test_cases[i].flags, NULL)); /* check return code */ ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list Ltp...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list |