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]
Date:	Wed, 19 Nov 2008 00:44:11 +0100
From:	Eric Lacombe <goretux@...il.com>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [x86] do_arch_prctl - bug?

I look at the Intel docs (vol. 3A) again, and see that in 64 bits mode the 
hidden field gs.base are physically mapped to the MSR, so it seems that in 
order to load gs.base we don't need to load gs (like in 32 bits mode), but 
rather we only need to load the MSR.

So I don't understand the purpose of load_gs_index in that context :

if (doit) {
	load_gs_index(0);
	ret = checking_wrmsrl(MSR_KERNEL_GS_BASE, addr);
}

Why don't we only load the MSR ?
What is the purpose of calling load_gs_index with 0 as parameter ?

Thanks in advance for your response,

	Eric

> ENTRY(native_load_gs_index)
>         CFI_STARTPROC
>         pushf
>         CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET 8
>         DISABLE_INTERRUPTS(CLBR_ANY | ~(CLBR_RDI))
>         SWAPGS
> gs_change:
>         movl %edi,%gs
> 2:      mfence          /* workaround */
>         SWAPGS
>         popf
>         CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET -8
>         ret
>         CFI_ENDPROC
> ENDPROC(native_load_gs_index)

--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ