[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56D716F7.3080407@nextfour.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 18:38:15 +0200
From: Mika Penttilä <mika.penttila@...tfour.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86: Make sure verify_cpu has a good stack
On 02.03.2016 18:15, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 05:55:14PM +0200, Mika Penttilä wrote:
>>> + /* Setup a stack for verify_cpu */
>>> + movq stack_start - __START_KERNEL_map, %rsp
>>> + subq $__START_KERNEL_map, %rsp
>>> +
>> You subtract __START_KERNEL_map twice ?
> Yes. That's not very obvious and it took me a while. I probably should
> add a comment.
>
> Want to stare at it a little bit more and try to figure it out or should
> I explain?
>
> :-)
>
I actually looked at it a while too...
The
movq stack_start - __START_KERNEL_map, %rsp
turns into (objdump disassembly)
mov 0x0,%rsp
with relocation
0000000000000004 R_X86_64_32S stack_start+0x0000000080000000
Now stack_start is at ffffffff81ef3380, so the relocation gives 1ef3380 which would be correct, so why the
second subq ?
You may explain :)
--Mika
Powered by blists - more mailing lists