[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YmxjRIh4SiTiqQKD@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 00:14:28 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@...rix.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] x86,entry: Use PUSH_AND_CLEAR_REGS for compat
On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 02:30:45PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 2:13 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > (Linus, can I add your SoB to the thing?)
>
> If you teste this with some actual old int80 compat syscalls, then absolutely:
I ran tools/testing/selftests/x86/*_32 on it. That definitely tickles
the int80 path. Also, without the off-by-one fixed that gives some
generous helpings of segfault.
> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Thanks!
> > + pushq %rdi /* pt_regs->di */
> > pushq %rsi /* pt_regs->si */
> > xorl %esi, %esi /* nospec si */
>
> It would probably make sense to add a comment about why %rdi isn't
> cleared when pushed, like all the other registers are.
>
> Even if that comment is just "%rdi will be overwritten as arg0 of the
> call to C, so no need to clear it".
>
> Maybe as part of the PUSH_AND_CLEAR_REGS changes?
I'll stick the comment on.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists