[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091110222140.GG26633@1wt.eu>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 23:21:40 +0100
From: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Matteo Croce <technoboy85@...il.com>,
Sven-Haegar Koch <haegar@...net.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: i686 quirk for AMD Geode
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 02:15:55PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> I immediately note that you have absolutely no check on the code
> segment, either in terms of code segment limits or even that we're in
> the right mode. Furthermore, you read user space -- code in user space
> is still user space -- without get_user().
Yes I remember about that one now. HCH told me about it.
> We also need NX protection
> to be honoured, and the various special subtleties of the x86
> instruction format (15-byte limit, for example) to be preserved: they
> aren't just there randomly, but are there to protect against specific
> failures.
OK.
> *THIS* is the kind of complexity that makes me think that having a
> single source for all interpretation done in the kernel is the preferred
> option.
I understand, your point. We just need to check when it becomes overkill
to use a full-blown emulator of 3 instructions and a few "simple" rules.
Willy
--
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