[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200122225230.GB2331824@rani.riverdale.lan>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 17:52:30 -0500
From: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>
To: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>
Cc: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12] x86/split_lock: Enable split lock detection by kernel
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 05:42:51PM -0500, Arvind Sankar wrote:
>
> Peter [2] called this a possible DOS vector. If userspace is malicious
> rather than buggy, couldn't it simply ignore SIGBUS?
>
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191121131522.GX5671@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net/
Ignore this last bit, wasn't thinking right.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists