linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	security@kernel.org, "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
	Mike Waychison <mikew@google.com>,
	Michael Davidson <md@google.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Mathias Krause <minipli@googlemail.com>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Security] DoS on x86_64
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:05:20 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B626C90.7070809@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1001282040160.3768@localhost.localdomain>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 730 bytes --]

On 01/28/2010 08:43 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 28 Jan 2010, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>
>> I think your splitup patch might still be a good idea in the sense that
>> your flush_old_exec() is the parts that can fail.
>>
>> So I think the splitup patch, plus removing delayed effects, might be
>> the right thing to do?  Testing that approach now...
> 
> So I didn't see any patch from you, so here's my try instead. 
> 

Sorry, was chasing bugs.  These two patches on top of your original
split patch works for me in testing so far.  I'm going to compare the
code with what your two new patches produce.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.


[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-Fix-the-flush_old_exec-patch-from-Linus.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch; name="0001-Fix-the-flush_old_exec-patch-from-Linus.patch", Size: 0 bytes --]



  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-01-29  5:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-01-28  7:34 DoS on x86_64 Mathias Krause
2010-01-28  8:18 ` [Security] " Andrew Morton
2010-01-28 15:41   ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-28 22:33     ` Linus Torvalds
2010-01-28 22:47       ` Mathias Krause
2010-01-28 22:47       ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-28 23:09         ` Linus Torvalds
2010-01-28 23:27           ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-28 23:46             ` Linus Torvalds
2010-01-29  4:43             ` Linus Torvalds
2010-01-29  4:43               ` [PATCH 1/2] Split 'flush_old_exec' into two functions Linus Torvalds
2010-01-29  4:47                 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86: get rid of the insane TIF_ABI_PENDING bit Linus Torvalds
2010-01-29  5:17                 ` [PATCH 1/2] Split 'flush_old_exec' into two functions H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-29  5:05               ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2010-01-29  5:29               ` [Security] DoS on x86_64 H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-29  5:34                 ` [PATCH 1/2] Split 'flush_old_exec' into two functions H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-29  5:34                   ` [PATCH 2/2] x86: get rid of the insane TIF_ABI_PENDING bit H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-29  5:36                 ` [PATCH 1/2] Split 'flush_old_exec' into two functions H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-29  5:36                   ` [PATCH 2/2] x86: get rid of the insane TIF_ABI_PENDING bit H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-29  5:41                 ` [PATCH 1/2] Split 'flush_old_exec' into two functions H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-29  5:41                   ` [PATCH 2/2] x86: get rid of the insane TIF_ABI_PENDING bit H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-29  5:44                     ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-29  6:14                 ` [PATCH 1/2] Split 'flush_old_exec' into two functions H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-29  6:14                 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86: get rid of the insane TIF_ABI_PENDING bit H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-28 23:06       ` [Security] DoS on x86_64 Linus Torvalds
2010-01-28 23:14         ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-28 21:31   ` Mathias Krause
2010-01-28 17:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-01-28 21:49   ` Mathias Krause
2010-01-28 21:58     ` Linus Torvalds
2010-01-28 22:08       ` Mathias Krause
2010-01-28 22:18         ` Linus Torvalds

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=4B626C90.7070809@zytor.com \
    --to=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=md@google.com \
    --cc=mikew@google.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=minipli@googlemail.com \
    --cc=roland@redhat.com \
    --cc=security@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).