Seth Arnold wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 07, 2002 at 04:03:41AM -0600, Joseph A. Knapka wrote: > > I also suspect (though I do not know this for certain) > > that the kernel is smart enough to detect kernel-stack > > overflow and kill the offending process. > > Nope. Things just start acting funny. :) If you are lucky you get a > panic soon. > > > trivial: just keep a read-only PTE at the end of the > > kernel stack, and if anything tries to write > > there, take a page fault, notice that it's adjacent > > to the task stack, and kill the process. > > Iterate over $n processes .. where $n is disturbingly large on some > systems. Hmm... Why not just look at the stack for "current"? > I agree it would be a nice debugging option to have :) but > i doubt it would ever be added to the mainstream kernel. Probably so, but I'd just like to understand your comment :-) -- Joe "I'd rather chew my leg off than maintain Java code, which sucks, 'cause I have a lot of Java code to maintain and the leg surgery is starting to get expensive." - Me -- Kernelnewbies: Help each other learn about the Linux kernel. Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/ FAQ: http://kernelnewbies.org/faq/
