lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [May]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [RFC] x86_64: A real proposal for iret-less return to kernel
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 02:52:55PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> Why is it a problem if user_mode_vm(regs)? Conversely, why is sending
>> a signal a remotely reasonable thing to do if !user_mode_vm(regs)?
>
> Let me quote Jiri:
>
> (1) task sends signal to itself
> (2) it acquires sighand->siglock so that it's able to queue the signal
> (3) MCE triggers

...and !user_mode_vm(regs), and hence we're IN_KERNEL, and we should
presumably just panic instead of trying to send a signal.

I missed the IN_KERNEL thing because I didn't realize that ->cs was
copied to struct mce.

--Andy


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-05-22 05:21    [W:0.180 / U:1.924 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site