[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <464CD44A.5000307@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 15:16:42 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Philipp Kohlbecher <pk031698@...-greifswald.de>
CC: Dave Jones <davej@...emonkey.org.uk>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-assembly@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.21.1] i386: save registers before intra-privilege
syscall
Philipp Kohlbecher wrote:
> From: Philipp Kohlbecher <pk031698@...-greifswald.de>
>
> The kernel_execve function issues a software interrupt (int 0x80) to make
> a system call to sys_execve. This function expects to find the stack segment
> and stack pointer of the function that issued the system call in the pt_regs
> struct. The syscall entry code that sets up this struct expects the stack
> segment and the stack pointer of the issuing function already on the stack.
> But the Intel processor saves these registers only if a stack-switch occurs,
> i.e. for inter-privilege interrupts and exceptions (cf. Intel Software
> Developer’s Manual, Vol. 3A, p. 5-17,
> http://www.intel.com/design/processor/manuals/253668.pdf).
> For an intra-privilege interrupt like the one issued in kernel_execve, these
> registers must be saved manually.
>
Could you describe the failure scenario this causes? I'm trying to
understand how something that fundamental would have possibly slipped by
testing?
-hpa
-
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