Chuck seems to have caught a bug, although the wrong one:
On Thu, 29 Nov 2007, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
>
> On 11/28/2007 07:42 PM, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > --- a/arch/x86/ia32/ptrace32.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/ia32/ptrace32.c
> > ...
> > + if (child == current)
> > + load_gs_index(child->thread.gsindex);
This is correct.
But the ones that do the same thing for fs/es/ds are *not*. Those three
registers are kernel mode registers (ds/es are the regular kernel data
segment, fs is the per-cpu data segment), and restored on return to user
space from the stack.
For similar reasons, this is wrong:
> > @@ -129,15 +137,23 @@ static int getreg32(struct task_struct *child, unsigned regno, u32 *val)
> > switch (regno) {
> > case offsetof(struct user32, regs.fs):
> > *val = child->thread.fsindex;
> > + if (child == current)
> > + asm("movl %%fs,%0" : "=r" (*val));
> > break;
That %fs is the kernel per-cpu thing, not the user %fs.
But this one is correct:
> > case offsetof(struct user32, regs.gs):
> > *val = child->thread.gsindex;
> > + if (child == current)
> > + asm("movl %%gs,%0" : "=r" (*val));
>
> Won't this return the kernel's GS instead of the user's?
No, %gs is untouched by the kernel, so it contains user space version, and
getting the value directly from %gs looks correct.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
