[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrVNGjdLv4zde=qz6kJW55yZxXvLqoHxbRpQCr==gW6gBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 07:49:13 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
"Bae, Chang Seok" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>,
"Metzger, Markus T" <markus.t.metzger@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 7/7] x86/ldt,ptrace: provide regset access to the LDT
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 2:18 PM H. Peter Anvin, Intel
<h.peter.anvin@...el.com> wrote:
>
> From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
>
> Provide ptrace/regset access to the LDT, if one exists. This
> interface provides both read and write access. The write code is
> unified with modify_ldt(); the read code doesn't have enough
> similarity so it has been kept made separate.
For this and for the GDT, you've chosen to use struct user_desc as
your format instead of using a native hardware descriptor format. Any
particular reason why? If nothing else, it will bloat core files a
bit more than needed.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists