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  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]
Date:	Sun, 5 Jan 2014 19:04:47 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <>
To:	Mike Galbraith <>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <>,
	Ben Hutchings <>,
	Thomas Gleixner <>,
	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	Steven Rostedt <>,, Brian Silverman <>,
	LKML <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86: Disable IST stacks for debug/int 3/stack
 fault for PREEMPT_RT"

On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 05:45:47AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-01-04 at 19:18 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: 
> > On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 02:55:48PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > > where do I start. Let me explain what is going on here. The code
> > > sequence
> > 
> > Yes the IST stacks are needed for correctness, even in more cases than
> > the example below. You cannot just disable them, just because you don't
> > like them.
> You had a better reason than dislike.

Ah true it was me. Good point. I forgot all about that.

Probably it needs some form of the NMI style paranoid_* switch.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists