[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <61793360-f37c-ec19-c390-abe3c76a5f5c@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 15:52:55 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omiun.org>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Vedvyas Shanbhogue <vedvyas.shanbhogue@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 12/27] x86/mm: Shadow stack page fault error
checking
On 07/10/2018 03:26 PM, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/traps.h
> @@ -157,6 +157,7 @@ enum {
> * bit 3 == 1: use of reserved bit detected
> * bit 4 == 1: fault was an instruction fetch
> * bit 5 == 1: protection keys block access
> + * bit 6 == 1: shadow stack access fault
> */
Could we document this bit better?
Is this a fault where the *processor* thought it should be a shadow
stack fault? Or is it also set on faults to valid shadow stack PTEs
that just happen to fault for other reasons, say protection keys?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists