From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] x86/dumpstack: Save first regs set for the executive summary
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 13:38:35 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180316183835.2nntffoj7qottgk7@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180316174529.GG5852@pd.tnic>
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 06:45:29PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > You're better off getting rid of the CR2 line from __show_regs(),
> > because it can be dangerously confusing. It's not actually part of the
> > saved register state at all, it's something entirely different. It's
> > like showing the current eflags rather than the eflags saved on the
> > faulting stack.
>
> Yeah, __show_regs() goes and gets a bunch of registers at the time
> __show_regs() runs. Which is ok for those which don't change in between
> but CR2 is special.
>
> We probably could improve that situation by having a struct fault_regs
> or so wrapping pt_regs and adding a bunch of fields like CR2 etc. Fault
> handlers would then populate fault_regs at fault time while we're atomic
> and then hand this struct down to the printing path.
>
> The printing path would fill out the rest and this way we won't have any
> of that monkey business anymore.
>
> Thoughts?
It would be nice if we could save *all* the printed registers before
they get a chance to change, but I don't know how feasible that is.
Some of the registers change in entry code, like CR3 and GS.
--
Josh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-16 18:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-15 15:44 [PATCH 0/9] x86/dumpstack: Cleanups and user opcode bytes Code: section, v2 Borislav Petkov
2018-03-15 15:44 ` [PATCH 1/9] x86/dumstack: Remove code_bytes Borislav Petkov
2018-03-15 18:12 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-03-15 15:44 ` [PATCH 2/9] x86/dumpstack: Unexport oops_begin() Borislav Petkov
2018-03-15 15:44 ` [PATCH 3/9] x86/dumpstack: Carve out Code: dumping into a function Borislav Petkov
2018-03-15 15:44 ` [PATCH 4/9] x86/dumpstack: Improve opcodes dumping in the Code: section Borislav Petkov
2018-03-15 18:10 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-03-15 18:16 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-03-15 19:06 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-03-16 11:57 ` David Laight
2018-03-15 18:19 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-03-15 18:23 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-03-15 15:44 ` [PATCH 5/9] x86/dumpstack: Add loglevel argument to show_opcodes() Borislav Petkov
2018-03-15 15:44 ` [PATCH 6/9] x86/fault: Dump user opcode bytes on fatal faults Borislav Petkov
2018-03-15 15:44 ` [PATCH 7/9] x86/dumpstack: Add a show_ip() function Borislav Petkov
2018-03-15 18:34 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-03-15 18:55 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-03-15 15:44 ` [PATCH 8/9] x86/dumpstack: Save first regs set for the executive summary Borislav Petkov
2018-03-15 19:01 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-03-16 11:48 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-03-16 12:01 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-03-16 12:11 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-03-16 13:16 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-03-16 13:44 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-03-16 17:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-03-16 17:40 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-03-16 17:45 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-03-16 18:38 ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]
2018-03-15 15:44 ` [PATCH 9/9] x86/dumpstack: Explain the reasoning for the prologue and buffer size Borislav Petkov
2018-03-15 18:07 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-03-15 18:17 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-03-15 17:51 ` [PATCH 0/9] x86/dumpstack: Cleanups and user opcode bytes Code: section, v2 Linus Torvalds
2018-04-17 14:40 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-04-17 20:16 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-04-17 21:06 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-04-18 13:26 ` Josh Poimboeuf
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-04-17 16:11 [PATCH 0/9] x86/dumpstack: Cleanups and user opcode bytes Code: section, v3 Borislav Petkov
2018-04-17 16:11 ` [PATCH 8/9] x86/dumpstack: Save first regs set for the executive summary Borislav Petkov
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=20180316183835.2nntffoj7qottgk7@treble \
--to=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--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 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).