From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7131D3857B8D for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 14:59:53 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 7131D3857B8D Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=owlfolio.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owlfolio.org Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C5935C0152 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 10:59:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap45 ([10.202.2.95]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 23 Sep 2022 10:59:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=owlfolio.org; h= cc:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1663945191; x=1664031591; bh=GqLgJRySsH v1TDe6l9X2dK6vj7YCR9KAOQzcagOjw2I=; b=aEgSafHMA4owT1Hfgsk8dbZCfh bapgUbopQRivgIkzHfx6agVYjLYr+h7zPuy9V5ra3yaaioscfRJcH5jVBnjRtXWj z0iXjHuuwpnTJDyjVfuvTxCe/TMPcpY1hDg/lDN+ujlfE8/WzEBKpSe0JRVVzJq7 t0ay69DXzg63Dx4p5t/x8v8XICQxUrWV3ln7o9bJYCX6prDOdUIUciSvL/YBQ3Vu F51Py9zFdS0GODKqLqD7NNd59Jh75U1oPRjaTDu24jrNjSkQyjEo3APK5CLfrcan TsIybSZCPcrRrqAxPLiIiDywdASfbW0E621qDA4YajCy+ZFKBQ1lAH7CUUcA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; t=1663945191; x=1664031591; bh=GqLgJRySsHv1TDe6l9X2dK6vj7YC R9KAOQzcagOjw2I=; b=CyM0/ZOvkoxTm2fho6j+R3wCEoHwBtqilbe/t/f6mvnd zJMOb/bLslIlcfqyD/gXb2if0usrIIcPYgVA+dJ/FcD8v5uOD2SvDMO+iebsMV94 DNN/RjctRnI0asZ8ft43WjL4BFzekrNNlQmwLjH9yjHrku+PfHCR0p2CoXqu18gW JGKw0lsVxeRgtlO0AU0TIuWRVuD6FTm75CV5KXQhhH1BEmrW0wLiBhBU6zEMtmL9 Tt2zPhIjlmlPr96qnuMprIJwlBGL77YneHd039MKMl1EjRQ1unF2hSaXnA3NjNlz r+SKqfDHI68ufXA9FhWEO1j/kX9u64CWPEquAM9NSw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrfeefiedgkeehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreertdenucfhrhhomhepfdgkrggt khcuhggvihhnsggvrhhgfdcuoeiirggtkhesohiflhhfohhlihhordhorhhgqeenucggtf frrghtthgvrhhnpefhuefhveeuffetfffgjeetgfekkeehfedtfeelgfehffffveehkeel fefgheffudenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhroh hmpeiirggtkhesohiflhhfohhlihhordhorhhg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i876146a2:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id E4379272007A; Fri, 23 Sep 2022 10:59:50 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.7.0-alpha0-935-ge4ccd4c47b-fm-20220914.001-ge4ccd4c4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <3fb8e41b-8717-4663-9a09-8259211d5d69@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <54c6018f-3b1d-84e9-04e5-55c0eca66a4c@linaro.org> References: <79dae81f-8e33-4499-a47a-93cc0903be6a@www.fastmail.com> <87fsgvvbwq.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <9d232b1b-f123-4189-bf09-dd29aab6486a@www.fastmail.com> <54c6018f-3b1d-84e9-04e5-55c0eca66a4c@linaro.org> Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2022 10:59:29 -0400 From: "Zack Weinberg" To: "GNU libc development" Subject: Re: RFC PATCH: Don't use /proc/self/maps to calculate size of initial thread stack Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Wed, Sep 21, 2022, at 4:58 PM, Adhemerval Zanella Netto via Libc-alpha wrote: > I wonder if we could use inplace mremap (which should be a nop) to inform > a more approximate value for the stack (the code only handles grown down > architecture): mremap is unusual enough that I think we'd have the same problem with seccomp filters that Florian pointed out regarding process_vm_readv. zw