[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <70261e2a-b87e-462e-964e-95a51ecde978@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 08:05:35 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Anton Altaparmakov <anton@...era.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
x86@...nel.org, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@...el.com>
Cc: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net>,
Mat Martineau <mathew.j.martineau@...ux.intel.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/pm: Fix false positive kmemleak report in
msr_build_context().
On 3/14/24 07:26, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> /* image of the saved processor state */
> struct saved_context {
> - /*
> - * On x86_32, all segment registers except gs are saved at kernel
> - * entry in pt_regs.
> - */
> - u16 gs;
> unsigned long cr0, cr2, cr3, cr4;
> u64 misc_enable;
> struct saved_msrs saved_msrs;
> @@ -27,6 +22,11 @@ struct saved_context {
> unsigned long tr;
> unsigned long safety;
> unsigned long return_address;
> + /*
> + * On x86_32, all segment registers except gs are saved at kernel
> + * entry in pt_regs.
> + */
> + u16 gs;
> bool misc_enable_saved;
> } __attribute__((packed));
Isn't this just kinda poking at the symptoms? This seems to be
basically the exact same bug as b0b592cf08, just with a different source
of unaligned structure members.
There's nothing to keep folks from reintroducing these kinds of issues
and evidently no way to detect when they happen without lengthy reproducers.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists