lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 12:39:09 +0200 From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>, Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>, Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org> Subject: Re: [patch V4 part 3 10/29] x86/idtentry: Provide macros to define/declare IDT entry points Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> writes: > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 7:15 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote: >> >> Provide DECLARE/DEFINE_IDTENTRY() macros. > > Acked-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> > > except: > >> >> DEFINE_IDTENTRY() provides a wrapper which acts as the function >> definition. The exception handler body is just appended to it with curly >> brackets. The entry point is marked notrace/noprobe so that irq tracing and >> the enter_from_user_mode() can be moved into the C-entry point. > > "noinstr", perhaps? I'm guessing you write this text before noinstr > happened. Yes. > Also, would it perhaps make sense in the future to include the > idtentry macro somehow (via inline asm or gcc options) so that > DEFINE_IDTENTRY() could emit the stub instead of leaving it to > DECLARE_IDTENTRY()? It might end up too messy in practice, I suppose. > This is obviously not worth changing right now, but maybe down the > road. Maybe. Right now my entry/rcu/tracing induced brainmelt is far too advanced to try thinking about it :)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists