Subject : v2.6.28-rc1: readlink /proc/*/exe returns uninitialized data to userspace Submitter : "Vegard Nossum" <vegard.nossum@gmail.com> Date : 2008-10-25 17:14 References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122495490201663&w=4 This entry is being used for tracking a regression from 2.6.27. Please don't close it until the problem is fixed in the mainline.
On Sunday, 2 of November 2008, Vegard Nossum wrote: > On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote: > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report > > of recent regressions. > > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions > > from 2.6.27. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know > > (either way). > > > > > > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11854 > > Subject : v2.6.28-rc1: readlink /proc/*/exe returns uninitialized > data to userspace > > Submitter : Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com> > > Date : 2008-10-25 17:14 (9 days old) > > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122495490201663&w=4 > > Been trying to reproduce this one since I saw it, and I think it can > be written off as can't reproduce :-( > > Maybe I can contribute a patch that verifies that the return value == > strlen(buffer), WARN_ON otherwise? And hope that somebody runs into > it.
Is not a regression, has probably been there since at least 2.6.9, probably longer too :-)
Dropped from the list of regressions, thanks.
I just tried it on 2.6.28-rc5 and it doesn't seem to be reproducible. [root@f10-vm1 modules]# uname -a Linux f10-vm1 2.6.28-rc5 #1 SMP Fri Nov 28 10:03:30 IST 2008 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux [root@f10-vm1 modules]# strace -e trace=readlink readlink /proc/2766/exe readlink("/proc/2766/exe", "/bin/bash"..., 64) = 9 /bin/bash [root@f10-vm1 modules]# strace -e trace=readlink readlink /proc/744/exe readlink("/proc/744/exe", "/sbin/udevd"..., 64) = 11 /sbin/udevd Let me know if I have missed something here... thanks!
Hi, Please see this thread for more info: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/11/4/105 And patch: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/11/11/379 So we are waiting for this to hit 2.6.28, I guess.
commit dc711ca35f9d95a1eec02118e0c298b5e3068315 in mainline and in -stable.