Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751989AbaG1Rjx (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2014 13:39:53 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35842 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751953AbaG1Rjv (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2014 13:39:51 -0400 Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 19:37:23 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kees Cook , Will Drewry , x86@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov , hpa@zytor.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/8] x86: Split syscall_trace_enter into two phases Message-ID: <20140728173723.GA20993@redhat.com> References: <3f649f5658a163645e3ce15156176c325283762e.1405992946.git.luto@amacapital.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3f649f5658a163645e3ce15156176c325283762e.1405992946.git.luto@amacapital.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Andy, I am really sorry for delay. This is on top of the recent change from Kees, right? Could me remind me where can I found the tree this series based on? So that I could actually apply these changes... On 07/21, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > +long syscall_trace_enter_phase2(struct pt_regs *regs, u32 arch, > + unsigned long phase1_result) > { > long ret = 0; > + u32 work = ACCESS_ONCE(current_thread_info()->flags) & > + _TIF_WORK_SYSCALL_ENTRY; > + > + BUG_ON(regs != task_pt_regs(current)); > > user_exit(); > > @@ -1458,17 +1562,20 @@ long syscall_trace_enter(struct pt_regs *regs) > * do_debug() and we need to set it again to restore the user > * state. If we entered on the slow path, TF was already set. > */ > - if (test_thread_flag(TIF_SINGLESTEP)) > + if (work & _TIF_SINGLESTEP) > regs->flags |= X86_EFLAGS_TF; This looks suspicious, but perhaps I misread this change. If I understand correctly, syscall_trace_enter() can avoid _phase2() above. But we should always call user_exit() unconditionally? And we should always set X86_EFLAGS_TF if TIF_SINGLESTEP? IIRC, TF can be actually cleared on a 32bit kernel if we step over sysenter insn? Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/