[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121121141627.GB21030@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:16:27 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: u3557@...o.sublimeip.com
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch_check_bp_in_kernelspace: fix the range check
Hi Amnon,
Please read my previous email ;)
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=135342649119153
On 11/21, u3557@...o.sublimeip.com wrote:
>
> Hi Oleg,
>
> > Or. Perhaps we can define TRAP_VSYSCALL and change emulate_vsyscall() to
> > do
> >
> >
> > if (current->ptrace && test_thread_flag(TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE))
> > send_sigtrap(TRAP_VSYSCALL, ...);
> >
> > if it returns true?
> >
>
> I wish it were possible, but the vsyscall page is entered in user-mode,
Only in NATIVE mode. emulate_vsyscall() runs in kernel mode.
And in the NATIVE mode PTRACE_SYSCALL should work just fine, because:
> The vsyscall page was designed in order to avoid user/kernel context
> switches,
True, it was. But not today. Please look at __vsyscall_page:
__vsyscall_page:
mov $__NR_gettimeofday, %rax
syscall
ret
If you want the "fast" sys_time() without entering the kernel, you can
use __vdso_time(). And since vdso has the user-space mapping you can
insert "int3" or use hw breakpoints.
At least this is my understanding after I glanced at the new implementation.
However. It is not that I think that TRAP_VSYSCALL is really good idea.
At least it needs another option...
Oleg.
--
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