Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] x86/alternative: Use a single access in text_poke() where possible

[hpa]

On January 10, 2019 9:42:57 AM PST, Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 12:32:43PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:20:04 -0600
>> Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> > > While I can't find a reason for hypervisors to emulate this
>instruction,
>> > > smarter people might find ways to turn it into a security
>exploit.  
>> > 
>> > Interesting point... but I wonder if it's a realistic concern. 
>BTW,
>> > text_poke_bp() also relies on undocumented behavior.
>> 
>> But we did get an official OK from Intel that it will work. Took a
>bit
>> of arm twisting to get them to do so, but they did. And it really is
>> pretty robust.
>
>Did we (they?) list any caveats for this behavior?  E.g. I'm fairly
>certain atomicity guarantees go out the window if WC memtype is used.

If you run code from non-WB memory, all bets are off and you better not be doing cross-modifying code.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.