linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] signal x86: Propage RF EFLAGS bit throught the signal restore call

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: <20130416144226.GA12848@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 16 Apr 2013 16:42:26 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Corey Ashford <cjashfor@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] signal x86: Propage RF EFLAGS bit throught the
	signal restore call

On 04/16, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 07:41:06PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > Adding RF EFLAGS bit to be restored on return from signal from
> > the original register context before the signal was entered.
> >
> > This will prevent the RF flag to disappear when returning
> > from exception due to the signal handler being executed.
>
> So that happens if, say, we get a breakpoint exception and then we
> run a signal handler before returning to the ip that triggered the
> breakpoint?

Afaics these changes (1 and 2) should fix the bug.

Suppose that the first insn in the signal handler should trigger
another bp, we should clear X86_EFLAGS_RF (2/6).

Otoh, we should restore it when we return to the original insn
which triggered the trap to avoid another trap.

But. it seems that we have yet another problem? Suppose that
the signal handler does siglongjmp() and jumps to yet another
insn which should trigger the trap?

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/