Re: [Solved] Re: Kernel Panic Cluedo
Re: [Solved] Re: Kernel Panic Cluedo
- Subject: Re: [Solved] Re: Kernel Panic Cluedo
- From: Stephane Sudre <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 23:10:23 +0100
On jeudi, novembre 23, 2006, at 08:14 PM, Michael Smith wrote:
Stephane wrote:
On Nov 22, 2006, at 6:04 PM, Michael Smith wrote:
Stephane wrote:
When you do some bad things in your Kernel Extension (such as
writing where you should not, reading a bit too far in buffers,
etc...), should a Kernel Panic occur in your Kernel Extension or
can it occur later?
It depends on what you damage. If you read/write completely out of
bounds, your code will fail. But if you destroy a pointer belonging
to someone else, there is no way for the hardware/kernel to know a)
that that's what you're doing, or b) to blame you when some other
code attempts to use it.
It turned out to be a copyin of a bigger size than required.
It could be cool if there was a Kernel simulator with memory
protection...
Protection of what? Read/write memory in the kernel map is freely
writable by any code within the kernel; this is what being a
"monolithic" kernel is all about.
Well, since this would be a simulator, ideally you would be able to
compile a specific version of a kext to run on it and you could tag
specific data as protected.
I can see plenty of usage for this "science fiction" simulator thing.
Given how much vilifiction Darwin has received for being a
"microkernel" because we "all know" how inefficient they are, I see
this rapidly becoming amusing.
I just don't care about this. I'm just dreaming of a solution which
would make it easier to track Kernel Panics. The positive output of
this bug is that from what I've seen it's apparently way easier to
reproduce a memory issue on an Intel Mac than on a PowerPC Mac.
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-kernel mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden