A potential bug to squeeze extra memory through command line arguments

[Dmitry V. Levin]

On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:08:16AM +0530, haris iqbal wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 5:09 AM, Dmitry V. Levin <ldv at altlinux.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 06:02:01PM +0530, haris iqbal wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Ok. I have come up with a separate memory model for tcbtab. In this
> > > model, we will use a linked list instead of a global array of pointers
> > > tcbtab.
> > >
> > > The structure
> > >
> > > struct s_tcbtab
> > > {
> > >     struct tcb* data;
> > >     struct s_tcbtab* next;
> > > }
> > >
> > > And a global head of the linked list.
> > >
> > > struct s_tcbtab* head_tcbtab = NULL;
> >
> > I suppose this memory model is better for some use cases and worse for
> > some other use cases.
> > What kind of strace usage would win/lose from this change?
> 
> quick question. How many pids can we give with the -p option?

It depends on the maximum length of the arguments to execve(2),
which varies between systems.


-- 
ldv
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.strace.io/pipermail/strace-devel/attachments/20160301/5526d273/attachment.bin>