[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160222204828.GC4140@test-lenovo>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 12:48:29 -0800
From: Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Sai Praneeth Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@...el.com>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/10] x86/xsaves: Fix PTRACE frames for XSAVES
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 12:00:02PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 02/22/2016 11:00 AM, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
> > + if (xsave->header.xfeatures & XFEATURE_MASK_SUPERVISOR)
> > + xsave->header.xfeatures = xfeatures | XFEATURE_MASK_SUPERVISOR;
> > + else
> > + xsave->header.xfeatures = xfeatures;
>
> This is dangerous. It says, "if any supervisor feature bit is set, then
> set *ALL* of the known bits". There's no way that can work.
>
> Don't you just want to or in the new bits that were in the passed-in
> 'xfeatures':
>
> xsave->header.xfeatures |= xfeatures;
>
> 'xfeatures' is known not to contain any supervisor bits.
>
It should have been:
xsave->header.xfeatures = xfeatures |
(xsave->header.xfeatures & XFEATURE_MASK_SUPERVISOR);
I'll fix it.
--Yu-cheng
Powered by blists - more mailing lists