linux-kernel - Re: [patches] [PATCH 2.6.21 review I] [4/25] x86: kernel-mode faults pollute current->thead

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: <45D17C66.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>
Date:	Tue, 13 Feb 2007 07:52:54 +0000
From:	"Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@...ell.com>
To:	"Jeff Dike" <jdike@...toit.com>
Cc:	"Andi Kleen" <ak@...e.de>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<patches@...-64.org>
Subject: Re: [patches] [PATCH 2.6.21 review I] [4/25] x86: kernel-mode
	faults pollute current->thead

>Yup.  How does this patch look to you?  We set error_code and trap_no
>for userspace faults and kernel faults which call die().  We don't set
>them for kernelspace faults which are fixed up.

Actually, after a second round of thinking I believe there's still more to do
- your second patch missed fixing i386's do_trap() similarly to x86-64's
and, vice versa, x86-64's do_general_protection() similarly to i386's.

Jan
-
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/