From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86emul: also put_fpu() on error paths Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 14:18:57 +0100 Message-ID: <5555F241.6020600@citrix.com> References: <555604A2020000780007A8CD@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1YtFWY-0005nW-Rz for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 15 May 2015 13:19:34 +0000 In-Reply-To: <555604A2020000780007A8CD@mail.emea.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich , xen-devel Cc: Keir Fraser List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 15/05/15 13:37, Jan Beulich wrote: > fail_if() and generate_exception_if() could theoretically bypass the > normal flow reaching put_fpu(), and not invoking it would leave the > fpu_exception_callback pointer in place, allowing for the callback to > be called at an unexpected time. Luckily the two > generate_exception_if()-s that would actually trigger this are > currently commented out, so this is not (yet) a (security) issue. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper