[lkml]   [2019]   [Apr]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch 00/14] x86/exceptions: Add guard patches to IST stacks
On Sun, 31 Mar 2019, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 3:10 PM Thomas Gleixner <> wrote:
> > While looking for something different I stumbled over the comment in struct
> > cpu_entry_area:
> >
> > * Exception stacks used for IST entries.
> > *
> > * In the future, this should have a separate slot for each stack
> > * with guard pages between them.
> >
> > As usual with such comments they are added in good faith and then
> > forgotten. Looking what it takes to fix that let me stumble over some other
> > leftovers like orig_ist[], now unused macros, useless defines and a bunch
> > of assumptions about the exception stacks being a big lump. Aside of that I
> > found a too broad check of the exception stack in the x86/64 stack overflow
> > detector.
> >
> > The following series cleans that up and gradually prepares for guard pages
> > between the IST stacks.
> Thanks! I'll review this over the next couple days.
> Meanwhile, if you're inspired, I have a WIP series to do the same
> thing to the IRQ stacks here:
> Want to take a look or pick it up if you want to keep working on this?

I grabbed the lot and addressed the todo's there. Not completely done
though, but it builds and boots :)

With all stacks having guard pages now, the stack_overflow_check() in
irq_64.c is kind of pointless. When the kernel overflows any of the stacks
independent of what we do with DB (we at least split it into 2 different
valid stacks) then it hits a guard page and dies. Mission accomplished....



 \ /
  Last update: 2019-04-03 18:31    [W:0.161 / U:4.152 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site