[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <41D6F2E2-C4CF-41DF-A843-FCBD03B7BEEB@amacapital.net>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 20:16:54 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
He Zhe <zhe.he@...driver.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>, devel@...ukata.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] x86/mm, tracing: Fix CR2 corruption
> On Jul 4, 2019, at 7:18 PM, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 5:03 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>>
>> Despire the current efforts to read CR2 before tracing happens there
>> still exist a number of possible holes:
>
> So this whole series disturbs me for the simple reason that I thought
> tracing was supposed to save/restore cr2 and make it unnecessary to
> worry about this in non-tracing code.
>
> That is very much what the NMI code explicitly does. Why shouldn't all
> the other tracing code do the same thing in case they can take page
> faults?
>
If nothing else, MOV to CR2 is architecturally serializing, so, unless there’s some fancy unwinding involved, this will be quite slow.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists