Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 05:43:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 05:43:44 -0500 Received: from trappist.elis.rug.ac.be ([157.193.67.1]:63437 "EHLO trappist.elis.rug.ac.be") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 05:43:25 -0500 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 11:42:55 +0100 (CET) From: Frank Cornelis To: vda cc: Subject: Re: Weird __put_user_asm behavior In-Reply-To: <01122416414400.02578@manta> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, > > So here it goes: when I patch the macro in include/asm-i386/uaccess.h > > named __put_user_asm using the patch below I cannot 'strace ls' anymore. > > The ld.so runtime linker just stops when preparing the program displaying > > a nice message; the same message as '/lib/ld-linux.so.2' generates when > > ran without any parameters. > > The kernel messages of __put_user_asm go to: 0xbffffb44; then the program > > stops on the ld.so message. > > But, 'strace'-ing of a static compiled program does the job as expected. > > What am I doing wrong? > > > --- linux-2.4.17/include/asm-i386/uaccess.h Sat Dec 22 09:35:17 2001 > > +++ linux/include/asm-i386/uaccess.h Mon Dec 24 12:43:22 2001 > > @@ -194,6 +194,10 @@ > > * aliasing issues. > > */ > > #define __put_user_asm(x, addr, err, itype, rtype, ltype) \ > > +do { \ > > + if (current->ptrace & PT_PTRACED) { \ > > + printk(KERN_DEBUG "__put_user_asm: %#x\n", (unsigned long)(addr)); \ > > + } \ > > __asm__ __volatile__( \ > > This must be clobbering some registers and some users of __put_user_asm > might not expect that... did you try saving/restoring all regs around this > 'if'? I tried to save/restore the eax register before/after the printk function call because this register is the only register on an i386 that a function may alter without preserving its previous contents (even when the function returns void). What is weird is that an __asm__ __volatile__("nop") within the if-statement works so it's not the if-statement itself that is causing the problem, also works is a "push %eax\n\tpop %eax" so again it's not the stack that is causing the problem. But, when I try to access the (addr) parameter then execve shows the ld.so message again. This is very odd because all it does is (in most cases because GCC optimizes a lot) pushing a general register containing (addr) onto the stack then call the function (I also tried a void func) and after the call restore esp. So, any more advice on this? Thanks in advance, Frank. PS: Yes, I'm a thesis student and I really need this :). - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/