[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101125074747.GD2538@nowhere>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 08:47:50 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani@...hat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Maciej Rutecki <maciej.rutecki@...il.com>,
Alexandre Julliard <julliard@...ehq.org>,
Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
"All since 2.6.33.x" <stable@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: Ignore trap bits on single step exceptions
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 09:32:02PM +0100, Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
> Hello Frederic,
>
> On 11/13/2010 10:37 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >When a single step exception fires, the trap bits, used to
> >signal hardware breakpoints, are in a random state.
> >
> >These trap bits might be set if another exception will follow,
> >like a breakpoint in the next instruction, or a watchpoint in the
> >previous one. Or there can be any junk there.
> >
> >So if we handle these trap bits during the single step exception,
> >we are going to handle an exception twice, or we are going to
> >handle junk.
> >
> >Just ignore them in this case.
> >
> >This fixes https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21332
> sorry for the delay in testing this.
>
> I have cherry-picked this patch on top of v2.6.37-rc3-102-gea49b16
> and the ntdll/exception tests pass now.
>
> Many thanks
> bye
> michael
Thanks for testing!
--
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