[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFxQfG09Hn33iTDt2L5iO5AiqTrXFODy-A+wf_xdpPoVKw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 13:50:56 -0400
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Use entire page for the per-cpu GDT only if paravirt-enabled
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
>
> Does anyone know what happens if you stick a non-accessed segment in
> the GDT, map the GDT RO, and access it?
You should get a #PF, as you guess, but go ahead and test it if you
want to make sure.
We do something very similar for the old Pentium F0 0F bug - we mark
the IDT read-only, which causes the (bogus) locked read of the IDT
entry that the F00F bug resulted in to be caught as a page fault
instead.
Linus
--
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