[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D4B930E.1060704@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2011 21:47:58 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Kees Cook <kees.cook@...onical.com>
CC: matthieu castet <castet.matthieu@...e.fr>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] broken ebba638ae723d8a8fc2f7abce5ec18b688b791d7
On 02/02/2011 12:40 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 05:10:03PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 01/31/2011 03:52 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>>
>>> This worked, thanks! If this tests cleanly for you in qemu, we should get
>>> this committed.
>>>
>>
>> This is wrong for at least one reason; possibly two:
>>
>> a) it ignores the control to not reload the segment registers (not
>> sure if anything still uses them, but...)
>>
>> b) I'm not sure that init_thread_union is safe for the non-BSP CPU here.
>
> What's the best way to move forward? Or, how can we find answers to these
> questions?
>
> -Kees
>
Can someone test out the attached patch and verify that it works?
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
View attachment "diff" of type "text/plain" (1005 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists