linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] Generic BUG handling.

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20060929085745.GA41098@muc.de>
Date:	Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:57:45 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@....de>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Hugh Dickens <hugh@...itas.com>,
	Michael Ellerman <michael@...erman.id.au>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] Generic BUG handling.

> Some architectures (powerpc) implement WARN using the same mechanism;
> if the illegal instruction was the result of a WARN, then report_bug()
> returns 1; otherwise it returns 0.

In theory we could do that on x86 too (and skipping the instruction), 
the only problem 
is that the only guaranteed to fault opcode is ud2 :/. Ok maybe we could
reserve some int XXX vector.

% gid WARN_ON | grep -v arch | wc -l
299

-Andi
-
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/