lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Jul]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: Dealing with the NMI mess
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 01:38:33PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > 2. Forbid IRET inside NMIs. Doable but maybe not that pretty.
>> >
>> > We haven't considered:
>> >
>> > 3. Forbid faults (other than MCE) inside NMI.
>>
>> I'd really prefer #2. #3 depends on us getting many things right, and
>> never introducing new cases in the future.
>>
>> #2, in contrast, seems to be fairly localized. Yes, RF is an issue,
>> but returning to user space with RF clear doesn't really seem to be
>> all that problematic.
>
> What's the worst case that can happen with RF cleared when returing
> to user space ? My understanding is that it's just that we risk to
> break again on an instruction that had a break point set and which
> already triggered the breakpoint, right ?

I assume Linus meant returning to kernel space with RF clear. Returns
to userspace have their own fancy logic here, and it's survived for a
couple of releases, including through an explicit test of RF handling
:)

--Andy


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-07-23 23:01    [W:1.819 / U:0.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site