[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrXeU7oi9F+k+mrjV=jo9TW9ic8tOA094j9mbyrX12Jazw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 09:00:21 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
xen-devel <Xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Does __KERNEL_DS serve a purpose?
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 1:01 AM, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com> wrote:
> On 08/04/2016 01:24, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> I can't see any reason that we need the __KERNEL_DS segment at all --
>> I think that everything that uses __KERNEL_DS could use __USER_DS
>> instead. Am I missing anything? This has been bugging me for a
>> while.
>>
>> I mulled over this a bit when trying to understand the sysret_ss_attrs
>> bug and then forgot about it.
>
> Linux doesn't have a separate __KERNEL_SS. For the plain data segments,
> the dpl is not interesting.
>
> However, %ss is also loaded with __KERNEL_DS, and %ss.dpl is somewhat
> important.
But %ss can be loaded with 0 on 64-bit kernels. (I assume that
loading 0 into %ss sets SS.DPL to 0 if done at CPL0, but I'm vague on
this, since it only really matters to hypervisor code AFAIK.)
32-bit kernels need __KERNEL_DS, I think.
--Andy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists