From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263936AbUDFSQJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Apr 2004 14:16:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263939AbUDFSQJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Apr 2004 14:16:09 -0400 Received: from web40506.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.78.123]:32395 "HELO web40506.mail.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S263936AbUDFSQE (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Apr 2004 14:16:04 -0400 Message-ID: <20040406181603.13828.qmail@web40506.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2004 11:16:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Sergiy Lozovsky Subject: Re: kernel stack challenge To: Horst von Brand Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <200404061618.i36GIHgW003419@eeyore.valparaiso.cl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --- Horst von Brand wrote: > Sergiy Lozovsky said: > > [...] > > [...] > > > No matter what particular LISP program does - it > can't > > crash the kernel - C code can do that easily. > > If the policy check goes into an infinite loop, the > kernel proper isn't > technically crashed, but useless anyway. And if you > can prove that can't > happen, you just solved the halting problem. > Congratulation! My code works during system calls (before the real one). Interrupts are enabled. If it enters the loop scheduler still can switch tasks (using timer for example). If it doesn't work in such way I can easily call schedule(); implicitly after some time limit will be reached - it's VM, so it's easy to do such things. So, it's my pleasure to accept your congratulations :-) Thanks. Serge. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/