On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 11:49:52AM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: > "Tobin C. Harding" <m...@tobin.cc> writes: > > > On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 11:10:56PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: > >> "Tobin C. Harding" <m...@tobin.cc> writes: > > [snip] > > > > Hi Michael, > > > > I'm working an adding support for ppc64 to leaking_addresses.pl, I've > > added the kernel address regular expression that you suggested. > > Thanks! > > > I'd like to add the false positive for vsyscall addresses. Excuse my > > ignorance but does PowerPC use a constant address range for vsyscall like > > x86_64 > > does? The ppc64 machine I have access to does not output anything for > > > > $ cat /proc/PID/tasks/PID/smaps or > > $ cat /proc/PID/tasks/PID/maps > > No we only have the vdso style vsyscall, which is mapped at user > addresses and is subject to ASLR, so you shouldn't need to worry about > it.
Great. I'll add you to the CC list for the next spin. In line with my aim of having the most confusing patches to follow the next version will likely be [PATCH 0/X v2] scripts/leaking_addresses: add summary report thanks, Tobin.
