[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200524234535.GA23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 00:45:35 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, sunhaoyl@...look.com,
x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/binfmt_elf.c: allocate initialized memory in
fill_thread_core_info()
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 04:33:49AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> FWIW, what I'm going to do is
> * make all callers of copy_regset_to_user() pass 0 as pos
> (there are very few exceptions - one on arm64, three on sparc32
> and five on sparc64; I hadn't dealt with arm64 one yet, but all
> cases on sparc are handled)
[snip]
Any of that would be easy to backport, though. Several questions
regaring XSAVE and friends:
* do we ever run on XSAVE/XSAVES-capable hardware with XFEATURE_FP
turned off?
* is it possible for x86 to have gaps between the state components
area as reported by CPUID 0x0d? IOW, can area for feature 2
(XFEATURE_YMM) to start *not* at 0x200 and can area for N start
not right after the end of area for N-1 for some N > 2?
I think I have an easy-to-backport solution, but I'm really confused
about XFEATURE_FP situation...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists