[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrVf91jv4X6t+WsRb2Fxhcj-ZCtPyL5TXE8CR0=1L4y-eg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 07:14:00 -0800
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, traps: install gates using IST after cpu_init().
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com> wrote:
> X86_TRAP_NMI, X86_TRAP_DF and X86_TRAP_MC use their own stack. Those
> stacks are invalid until cpu_init() installs TSS.
>
> This patch moves setting of the 3 gates after cpu_init().
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>
> ---
>
> If I understand correctly, logically speaking the original code is
> incorrect. However, there is no real bug caused by it for serval years.
> I'm not sure whether this fix is practical or not. Fix them only for
> logical correctness.
Acked-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
That being said, I'm pretty sure you're not fixing a bug here.
Delivery of an exception with no handler is every bit as fatal as
delivery of an exception with a non-working IST handler.
--Andy
--
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