On 09/11/2015 22:16, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Friday, November 06, 2015 07:02:59 PM Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>> On 11/06/15 12:20, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>>> Now the strange part:
>>> 0xffffffff80619a18 <+744>: jne 0xffffffff80619a61
>>> 0xffffffff80619a1a <+746>: mov %rbx,(%rsp)
>>> => 0xffffffff80619a1e <+750>: movq $0x0,0x18(%rsp)
>>> 0xffffffff80619a27 <+759>: movq $0x0,0x10(%rsp)
>>> 0xffffffff80619a30 <+768>: movq $0x0,0x8(%rsp)
>> Were these instructions dumped from RAM or from the kernel ELF file?
> Probably not from RAM. You can use 'info files' in gdb to see what is
> handling the address range in question (core vs executable). x/i in ddb
> would have been the "real" truth.
Yes, according to the output of files it looks like gdb would read that data
from the text section of the kernel file.
How about libkvm? Would kvm_read read data from the core file?
I've written the following small program (cut down dmesg.c, actually):
(kgdb) disassemble /r
=> 0xffffffff80619a1e <+750>: 48 c7 44 24 18 00 00 00 00 movq
$ vmcore_read -N /boot/kernel.29/kernel -M /var/crash/vmcore.29
48 c7 44 24 18 00 00 00 00
Seems like the code is intact.
1. To correct something I said earlier, the fault is #UD, not #GP.
2. The only "suspicious" activity at the time of the crash was the execution of
a bhyve VM.
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"