linux-kernel - Re: [tip:x86/irq] x86: Always use irq stacks

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, 14 Jul 2010 12:02:38 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	tglx@...utronix.de
Cc:	hch@....de, mingo@...e.hu, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org,
	rostedt@...dmis.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/irq] x86: Always use irq stacks

From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 17:27:01 +0200 (CEST)

> On Wed, 14 Jul 2010, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> 
>> Turns out this wasn't a regression introduced by a commit, but it
>> happens when CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER is enabled.  From a quick
>> look I have no idea why these would interact badly, especially as
>> CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER works fine with irq stacks if the
>> CONFIG_4KSTACKS options is set.
> 
> So you're saying, that the problem appears when
> CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER is enabled w/o being used and that it
> exists prior to your patches with irq stacks and 8k stack size, but
> works with 4k stacks. That's definitely more than odd.

Some hard-coded check somewhere assuming kernel stack pages
won't straddle a page boundary?

Just a guess...
--
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/