[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1405212323190.12047@pobox.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 23:25:51 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] x86_64: A real proposal for iret-less return to kernel
On Wed, 21 May 2014, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > ISTM the do_machine_check code ought to consider any kill-worthy MCE
> > from kernel space to be non-recoverable, but I want to keep the scope
> > of these patches under control.
>
> MCA has a bit called RIPV which, if set, signals that RIP is valid and
> it is safe to return provided we've taken proper care of handling even
> non-correctable errors (memory poisoning, etc).
Yeah, but it tries to send SIGBUS from MCE context. And if MCE triggered
at the time the CPU was already holding sighand->siglock for that
particular task, it'll deadlock against itself.
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
--
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