linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] i386: improve double fault 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-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080728162816.GB27662@elte.hu>
Date:	Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:28:16 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386: improve double fault handling


* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:

> Jan Beulich wrote:
>>
>>> Firstly, 64-bit does not use a task gate for double faults anymore. 
>>> (but uses a separate IST stack for double faults)
>>
>> Sure - because there are no task gates on 64-bit.
>>
>
> What we're doing here is really using task gates to emulate IST 
> anyway.

yes, because we dont use the main feature that differentiates task gates 
from ISTs: a different cr3 entry. (the rest of the differences is really 
just fluff)

	Ingo
--
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/