Hi Michel,
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>>> On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Bob Liu
On 11/06/2012 10:54 PM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>>> On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Bob Liu wrote:
> Hmm, I
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>>> On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Bob Liu wrote:
Hmm, I attached a simple fix patch.
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Miche
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Bob Liu wrote:
>>> Hmm, I attached a simple fix patch.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Michel Lespinasse
>> (also ran some tests with it, but I could never r
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Bob Liu wrote:
>> Hmm, I attached a simple fix patch.
>
> Reviewed-by: Michel Lespinasse
> (also ran some tests with it, but I could never reproduce the original
> issue anyway).
Wait a minute, this is ac
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Bob Liu wrote:
> Hmm, I attached a simple fix patch.
Reviewed-by: Michel Lespinasse
(also ran some tests with it, but I could never reproduce the original
issue anyway).
Bob, it would be easier if you had sent the original patch inline
rather than as an attachmen
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Bob Liu wrote:
>> The loop for each entry of vma->anon_vma_chain in validate_mm() is not
>> protected by anon_vma lock.
>> I think that may be the cause.
>>
>> Michel, What's your opinion？
>
> Good catch,
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Bob Liu wrote:
> The loop for each entry of vma->anon_vma_chain in validate_mm() is not
> protected by anon_vma lock.
> I think that may be the cause.
>
> Michel, What's your opinion？
Good catch, I think that's it. Somehow it had not occured to me to
verify the che
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Ping?
>
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On 10/18/2012 06:46 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools (lkvm) guest, on today's
>>> linux-next kernel,
>>> I saw the follow
Ping?
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 10/18/2012 06:46 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools (lkvm) guest, on today's
>> linux-next kernel,
>> I saw the following:
>>
>> [ 1857.278176] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL poin
On 10/18/2012 06:46 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools (lkvm) guest, on today's
> linux-next kernel,
> I saw the following:
>
> [ 1857.278176] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
> 0090
> [ 1857.283725] IP: [] anon
Hi all,
While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools (lkvm) guest, on today's
linux-next kernel,
I saw the following:
[ 1857.278176] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
0090
[ 1857.283725] IP: [] anon_vma_interval_tree_verify+0xf/0xa0
[ 1857.283725] PGD 6e19e06
12 matches
Mail list logo
