Re: + espfix-code-cleanup.patch added to -mm tree

[Stas Sergeev]

Hi,

Zachary Amsden wrote:
> You need to get a #GP or #NP on the faulting iret.  Several ways to do 
> that -
I do that much simpler - I provoke a SIGSEGV and in a signal handler
I put the wrong value to scp->cs or scp->ss, and that makes iret to fault.

> iret faults, but doesn't pop the user return frame.
But does it push the kernel frame after it or not?
If not - I don't understand how we go to a fixup.
If yes - I don't understand how the user's frame gets
accessed later, as it is above the kernel's frame.

> > safe limit is regs->esp + THREAD_SIZE*2... Well, may just I not do 
> > that please? :)
> > For what, btw? There are no such a things for __KERNEL_DS or anything, so
> > I just don't see the necessity.
> It helps track down any bugs that could leak through otherwise and 
> corrupt random memory.
I think regs->esp + THREAD_SIZE*2 is already very permissive,
and I'd like to avoid messing with granularity. So unless you
really insist, I'll better not do that. :)

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/