On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 01:50:12PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> Hi Jiri,
>
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 15:00:02 +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > +static int thread_init(struct thread_data *td)
> > +{
> > + void *map;
> > +
> > + map = mmap(NULL, page_size, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE,
> > + MAP_SHARED|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0);
>
> Shouldn't it be an executable mapping to be found by MAP__FUNCTION?
yea.. looks like my arch implies PROT_EXEC via PROT_READ, man mmap:
On some hardware architectures (e.g., i386), PROT_WRITE implies PROT_READ.
It is architecture dependent whether PROT_READ
implies PROT_EXEC or not. Portable programs should always set PROT_EXEC if
they intend to execute code in the new mapping.
mm/mmap.c:
/*
* Does the application expect PROT_READ to imply PROT_EXEC?
*
* (the exception is when the underlying filesystem is noexec
* mounted, in which case we dont add PROT_EXEC.)
*/
if ((prot & PROT_READ) && (current->personality & READ_IMPLIES_EXEC))
if (!(file && (file->f_path.mnt->mnt_flags & MNT_NOEXEC)))
prot |= PROT_EXEC;
I'll set the PROT_EXEC as the man page says.
thanks,
jirka
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
