linux-kernel - Re: [patch 1/2] x86_64 page fault NMI-safe

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]

Message-ID: <20100714193652.GA13630@nowhere>
Date:	Wed, 14 Jul 2010 21:36:55 +0200
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...tedt.homelinux.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] x86_64 page fault NMI-safe

On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 12:14:01PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> >>  NMI entry:
> >
> > I think at this point [NMI re-entry] we've corrupted the top of the NMI kernel
> > stack already, due to entering via the IST stack mechanism, which is
> > non-nesting and which enters at the same point - right?
> 
> Yeah, you're right, but we could easily fix that up. We know we don't
> need any stack for the nested case, so all we would need to do is to
> just subtract a small bit off %rsp, and copy the three words or so to
> create a "new" stack for the non-nested case.
> 
> > We could solve that by copying that small stack frame off before entering the
> > 'generic' NMI routine - but it all feels a bit pulled in by the hair.
> 
> Why? It's much cleaner than making the _real_ codepaths much worse.



There is also the fact we need to handle the lost NMI, by defering its
treatment or so. That adds even more complexity.

--
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/