From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>,
x86@kernel.org, live-patching@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86, stackvalidate: Compile-time stack frame pointer validation
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 16:26:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150428142655.GG5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150428142105.GB17315@treble.redhat.com>
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 09:21:05AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > I tried that, but I discovered that gcc's usage of frame pointers would
> > > be a lot harder to validate. It only sets up the frame pointer in code
> > > paths which have call instructions. There are a lot of functions which
> > > have conditional jumps at the beginning which can jump straight to a
> > > return instruction without first doing the frame pointer setup.
> >
> > Hmm, would not such code break your patching?
>
> No, because we'll also do some runtime stack validation (which will be a
> future patch set). If we detect preemption or an irq frame on the
> stack, we'll assume the stack is unreliable and delay the patching of
> the task (*).
Ah, which fixes your second issue too (the interrupt before frame
setup). OK.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-28 14:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-27 13:56 [PATCH 0/2] Compile-time stack frame pointer validation Josh Poimboeuf
2015-04-27 13:56 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86, stackvalidate: " Josh Poimboeuf
2015-04-28 12:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-04-28 14:04 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-04-28 14:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-04-28 14:21 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-04-28 14:26 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-04-28 16:44 ` Petr Mladek
2015-04-28 17:54 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-04-27 13:56 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86, stackvalidate: Add asm frame pointer setup macros Josh Poimboeuf
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150428142655.GG5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mmarek@suse.cz \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.