Date: Tue, 23 Dec 1997 04:17:59 +1100 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: cschuber@uumail.gov.bc.ca, toor@dyson.iquest.net Cc: dhawk@river.org, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG, mike@smith.net.au Subject: Re: Is this something to worry about? Message-ID: <199712221717.EAA32525@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>I get this behavior consistently under 2.2.2 when running restore. If I >restore a file I can repeat this 100% of the time. Another way to repeat this >100% of the time is to use GDB and set a breakpoint in a program. > >My questions are, is this a VM fix or a PROCFS fix? Do you feel comfortable >enough with the fix to have this merged into -stable by the time that 2.2.6 is >released? The gdb fix is both: #dyson 97/04/05 18:29:49 # # Modified: sys/i386/i386 trap.c # sys/miscfs/procfs procfs_mem.c # sys/vm vm_fault.c vm_map.c vm_map.h vm_prot.h # Log: # Fix the gdb executable modify problem. Thanks to the detective work # by Alan Cox <alc@cs.rice.edu>, and his description of the problem. # # The bug was primarily in procfs_mem, but the mistake likely happened # due to the lack of vm system support for the operation. I added # better support for selective marking of page dirty flags so that # vm_map_pageable(wiring) will not cause this problem again. # # The code in procfs_mem is now less bogus (but maybe still a little # so.) # # Revision Changes Path # 1.89 +7 -7 src/sys/i386/i386/trap.c # 1.24 +47 -80 src/sys/miscfs/procfs/procfs_mem.c # 1.67 +11 -9 src/sys/vm/vm_fault.c # 1.73 +11 -3 src/sys/vm/vm_map.c # 1.25 +7 -4 src/sys/vm/vm_map.h # 1.8 +2 -1 src/sys/vm/vm_prot.h There is also at least one fix to the fix. I don't know anything about the restore problem. restore doesn't seem to use procfs. I'm not comfortable merging anything into -stable, since I never run it. Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199712221717.EAA32525>