linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] x86 fixes

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1263708023.14137.1213.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Sun, 17 Jan 2010 06:00:23 +0000
From:	Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk>
To:	Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86 fixes

On Sat, 2010-01-16 at 19:18 -0500, Brian Gerst wrote: 
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 16 Jan 2010, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >>
> >> Cyrill Gorcunov (1):
> >>       x86: kernel_thread() -- initialize SS to a known state
> >
> > This looks bogus. Why does it do it only on x86-64?
> >
> > Either people care about SS or they don't (the answer, I suspect, is "they
> > don't"). But if they care, we should do it on both 32-bit _and_ 64-bit,
> > no?
> 
> 32-bit doesn't care about ss or esp since it won't pop them from the
> stack when returning to the same privilege level.

Right! That's the bit of behaviour I wasn't thinking of.

Thanks, Ian.

-- 
Ian Campbell

Under every stone lurks a politician.
		-- Aristophanes

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (199 bytes)