Jay Estabrook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, Jun 01, 2000 at 08:33:30PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote: > > > > This is kernel 2.2.15 or 2.2.16pre7 (same on both). The following > > test program, run as *ANY* user on the system (not just root), causes > > a segfault (expected) and a kernel oops every time it is run. > > Why do you say that a segfault is expected, because x86 does?
Well I guess I generally expect a segfault when I read data into 0x0 :-) Not sure that it is proper for read(2) to be divergent or not (is this POSIX?) > >From what I can see of the "read" semantics, IMHO, "read" would be > justified (on *any* architecture) in returning an error indicating a > bad address was specified, and no segfault need actually occur or be > delivered to the user process. > > Proper behavior for that program, again IMHO, thus is an infinite loop > of failing "reads", because the EFAULT return error is being ignored. > > But yes, of course the Oops is wrong; I have patches to fix that, > ready for 2.2.16 and 2.4.0-test1. Excellent! -- John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www.complete.org Sr. Software Developer, Progeny Linux Systems, Inc. www.progenylinux.com #include <std_disclaimer.h> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The 13,112,877th prime number is 239,059,897.
