[PATCH v2 2/5] x86/fault: Don't try to recover from an implicit supervisor access

[Andy Lutomirski]

This avoids a situation in which we attempt to apply various fixups
that are not intended to handle implicit supervisor accesses from
user mode if we screw up in away that causes this type of fault.

Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
 arch/x86/mm/fault.c | 10 ++++++++++
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
index 82881bc5feef..ca38bd0472f2 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c
@@ -653,6 +653,15 @@ no_context(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long error_code,
 	unsigned long flags;
 	int sig;
 
+	if (user_mode(regs)) {
+		/*
+		 * This is an implicit supervisor-mode access from user
+		 * mode.  Bypass all the kernel-mode recovery code and just
+		 * OOPS.
+		 */
+		goto oops;
+	}
+
 	/* Are we prepared to handle this kernel fault? */
 	if (fixup_exception(regs, X86_TRAP_PF, error_code, address)) {
 		/*
@@ -738,6 +747,7 @@ no_context(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long error_code,
 	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EFI))
 		efi_recover_from_page_fault(address);
 
+oops:
 	/*
 	 * Oops. The kernel tried to access some bad page. We'll have to
 	 * terminate things with extreme prejudice:
-- 
2.17.2