[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070814183119.GC17694@angus.ind.WPI.EDU>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:31:19 -0400
From: Chuck Anderson <cra@....EDU>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: wdc@....edu
Subject: vm86.c audit_syscall_exit() call trashes registers
Please Cc: any replies, as we are not subscribed to linux-kernel.
Thanks.
Somewhere around 2.6.16.12 a call to audit_syscall_exit was added to
vm86.c:
static void do_sys_vm86(struct kernel_vm86_struct *info, struct task_struct *tsk)
{
struct tss_struct *tss;
+ long eax;
/*
* make sure the vm86() system call doesn't try to do anything silly
*/
@@ -305,13 +307,19 @@ static void do_sys_vm86(struct kernel_vm
tsk->thread.screen_bitmap = info->screen_bitmap;
if (info->flags & VM86_SCREEN_BITMAP)
mark_screen_rdonly(tsk->mm);
+ __asm__ __volatile__("xorl %eax,%eax; movl %eax,%fs; movl %eax,%gs\n\t");
+ __asm__ __volatile__("movl %%eax, %0\n" :"=r"(eax));
+
+ /*call audit_syscall_exit since we do not exit via the normal paths */
+ if (unlikely(current->audit_context))
+ audit_syscall_exit(current, AUDITSC_RESULT(eax), eax);
+
__asm__ __volatile__(
- "xorl %%eax,%%eax; movl %%eax,%%fs; movl %%eax,%%gs\n\t"
"movl %0,%%esp\n\t"
"movl %1,%%ebp\n\t"
"jmp resume_userspace"
: /* no outputs */
- :"r" (&info->regs), "r" (task_thread_info(tsk)) : "ax");
+ :"r" (&info->regs), "r" (task_thread_info(tsk)));
/* we never return here */
}
This appears to have caused intermittent data corruption of the
results of the vm86() call that the X server uses to get EDID data
from the monitor via the VESA BIOS. After removing the
audit_syscall_exit() call, the problems mentioned in these bugzillas
disappear:
Fetch of EDID 128 byte buffer by X server through vm86 INT 10 call is flaky.
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8633
RHEL 5 fails to get EDID data from monitor and sets low resolution
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=236416
If I'm reading correctly, it appears that the code above trashes the
%fs and %gs registers, or otherwise doesn't leave them at zero before
returning from the system call as the old code did. Is this a correct
analysis? How should this be fixed?
Thanks.
-Chuck
-
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