lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 13:50:25 +1100 From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org> To: Li Zhong <zhong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, fweisbec@...il.com, benh@...nel.crashing.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/6] powerpc: Exception hooks for context tracking subsystem On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 06:00:17PM +0800, Li Zhong wrote: > This is the exception hooks for context tracking subsystem, including > data access, program check, single step, instruction breakpoint, machine check, > alignment, fp unavailable, altivec assist, unknown exception, whose handlers > might use RCU. > > This patch corresponds to > [PATCH] x86: Exception hooks for userspace RCU extended QS > commit 6ba3c97a38803883c2eee489505796cb0a727122 > > Signed-off-by: Li Zhong <zhong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Is there a reason why you didn't put the exception_exit() call in ret_from_except_lite in entry_64.S, and the exception_entry() call in EXCEPTION_PROLOG_COMMON? That would seem to catch all these cases in a more centralized place. Also, I notice that with the exception_exit calls where they are, we can still deliver signals (thus possibly taking a page fault) or call schedule() for preemption after the exception_exit() call. Is that OK, or is it a potential problem? Paul. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists