[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170816125715.GB3384@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 13:57:15 +0100
From: Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Sai Praneeth Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@...el.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
joeyli <jlee@...e.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
"Neri, Ricardo" <ricardo.neri@...el.com>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86/efi: Use efi_switch_mm() rather than manually
twiddling with cr3
On Wed, 16 Aug, at 12:03:22PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>
> I'd expect we'd abort at a higher level, not taking any sample. i.e.
> we'd have the core overflow handler check in_funny_mm(), and if so, skip
> the sample, as with the skid case.
FYI, this is my preferred solution for x86 too.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists