[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230720092807.GB3570477@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 11:28:07 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
alyssa.milburn@...ux.intel.com, keescook@...omium.org,
joao@...rdrivepizza.com, tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: Rewrite ret_from_fork() in C
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 07:22:08AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > I'm not sure that would be worth the trouble / cleverness. The hint is
> > straightforward IMO.
>
> I tried, it doesn't work, clearly I missed something.
FWIW, I tried the below. That should make user_mode() true for the
kernel thread regset, and while the kernel did boot, it still fails the
livepatch self-test.
The difference seems to be that END_OF_STACK terminates it right there,
while REGS thinks its a valid frame and only terminates on user_mode()
when unwinding one more frame. The frame at REGS clearly isn't very
sane.
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
index 72015dba72ab..45a400b16b80 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
@@ -232,6 +232,7 @@ int copy_thread(struct task_struct *p, const struct kernel_clone_args *args)
* It does the same kernel frame setup to return to a kernel
* function that a kernel thread does.
*/
+ childregs->cs = 3;
childregs->sp = 0;
childregs->ip = 0;
kthread_frame_init(frame, args->fn, args->fn_arg);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists