-----Original Message----- > 在 2021年03月23日 14:11, HAGIO KAZUHITO(萩尾 一仁) 写道: > > Hi Lianbo, > > > > -----Original Message----- > >> The 'sy' command may be misused, which is mistakenly considered as > >> the 'symbol-file' command in the crash utility, this will discard > >> symbol table from the current symbol file, and eventually caused the > >> failure of crash utility after executing the 'sys' command as below: > >> > >> crash> sy > >> GNU_GET_DATATYPE[sy]: returned via gdb_error_hook > >> Discard symbol table from `/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/modules/5.11.0-2.el9.x86_64/vmlinux'? (y or n) Please > >> answer y or n. > >> Discard symbol table from `/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/modules/5.11.0-2.el9.x86_64/vmlinux'? (y or n) No > symbol > >> file now. > >> crash> sys > >> GNU_GET_SYMBOL_TYPE: returned via gdb_error_hook > >> double free or corruption (!prev) > >> Aborted (core dumped) > >> > >> Actually, the 'symbol-file' command has been added to the gdb-prohibited > >> list. To prevent current error, let's add the 'sy' command to the list > >> so that the crash utility does not pass the 'sy' command directly to GDB. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Lianbo Jiang <lijiang@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > ok, thanks. > > > > Acked-by: Kazuhito Hagio <k-hagio-ab@xxxxxxx> > > > Thank you for the comment, Kazu. > > > I'm afraid that this kind of patch work can be endless, as gdb accepts > > abbreviations of its commands. but this is the first one I see and > > likely to hit it accidentally, I ack this patch. > > > Agree with you. It can not cover all cases that users intentionally input > the 'wrong' commands, but it could be necessary to prevent the critical > error by the accidental input. > > > However, if similar issues are reported, it would be good to think about > > a better way. (e.g. prefix matching? I'm not sure if it's feasible and > > they're worth taking efforts to fix..) > > > The command name abbreviations are useful in the GDB, but for the crash-utility, > need to carefully cope with this feature. > > It could not be worth covering all cases about this issue as we mentioned above. > So far, I haven't found a good way to fix these problems. Maybe we could provide > a document to clarify such issues? Yes, it look like crash doesn't have a description of the prohibited gdb commands, that would be kind to users. Anyway, I've merged this first. (with editing the commit message a bit) https://github.com/crash-utility/crash/commit/f30c5075de1b2600240d3613f78f0ab5c495a7f2 Thanks, Kazu -- Crash-utility mailing list Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility
