linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/2] selftests/x86: sysret

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Y9ClotgPpMLrsucQ@biznet-home.integral.gnuweeb.org>
Date:   Wed, 25 Jan 2023 10:44:34 +0700
From:   Ammar Faizi <ammarfaizi2@...weeb.org>
To:     "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Xin Li <xin3.li@...el.com>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@...rix.com>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        x86 Mailing List <x86@...nel.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linux Kselftest Mailing List 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/2] selftests/x86: sysret_rip: Handle syscall in
 a FRED system

On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 10:37:17AM +0700, Ammar Faizi wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 10:22:39AM +0700, Ammar Faizi wrote:
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Test that we don't get a mix of REGS_SAVED and REGS_SYSRET.
> > +	 * It needs at least calling do_syscall() twice to assert.
> > +	 */
> > +	if (regs_ok_state == REGS_UNDEFINED) {
> > +		/*
> > +		 * First time calling do_syscall().
> > +		 */
> > +		regs_ok_state = ret;
> > +		return ret;
> > +	} else {
> 
> Oops, this should not be returning ret here. Ignore this version.
> I'll send v5.

Side note: This mistake doesn't affect the test correctness because
we currenly don't use the return value of do_syscall().

But still worth fixing...

-- 
Ammar Faizi