linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: push old stack address on irqstack for unwinder

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:	Sat, 31 Jan 2009 01:50:47 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Martin Hicks <mort@....com>, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
	heukelum@...lshack.com, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: push old stack address on irqstack for unwinder


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

> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>
>> Would be nice to have an #ifdef-less primitive for this - something like:
>>
>> 	pushq_frame %rbp
>>
>> and a matching:
>>
>> 	popq_frame %rbp
>>
>> for those cases that need it (this one doesnt as we dont pop out of the 
>> stack).
>>
>
> It certainly would if this isn't a singleton, which I think it could 
> possibly be?

yeah. This is pretty much the only non-restored frame we construct so 
indeed it would be a singleton. Perhaps the IST ones are such ones too.

> Otherwise it really should be a part of an entry/exit macro; this is 
> somewhat special in that it sets up a frame pointer as something other 
> than a normal entry/exit sequence.

Sure - your call really.

	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/