From: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
To: Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@yahoo.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
Subject: [PATCH -tip] kmemcheck: fix dynamic enable/disable
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:20:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081124122013.GA24810@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
(Ingo: Will send pull request for this later :-))
>From 6f505f59011e565c2dbb7a220702feb0447cc854 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:52:05 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] kmemcheck: fix dynamic enable/disable
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I received a lot of errors after manually enabling kmemcheck
> in /proc (it had been turned off due to oneshot mode). It
> might be a good idea to put a warning that errrors found after
> enabling it at any time other than boot might be spurious.
Fixed. This was the problem: Instructions with multiple address
operands could look up the shadow of an address that had
previously been un-hidden. After handling the memory access, the
page would get hidden again. The fix is to verify that the page
is present before we return a shadow pointer.
Reported-by: Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@yahoo.com>
Signed-off-by: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
---
arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/kmemcheck.c | 10 ++++++++++
arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/shadow.c | 2 ++
2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/kmemcheck.c b/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/kmemcheck.c
index 056b4f1..12a4bbd 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/kmemcheck.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/kmemcheck.c
@@ -707,6 +707,16 @@ bool kmemcheck_trap(struct pt_regs *regs)
}
/*
+ * At this point, we know that the trap was kmemcheck's. However, if
+ * kmemcheck was disabled, we need to return immediately (and stop
+ * emulating the REP instruction).
+ */
+ if (!kmemcheck_enabled) {
+ kmemcheck_hide(regs);
+ return true;
+ }
+
+ /*
* We're emulating a REP MOVS/STOS instruction. Are we done yet?
* Of course, 64-bit needs to handle CX/ECX/RCX differently...
*/
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/shadow.c b/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/shadow.c
index 196dddc..62a0f63 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/shadow.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/shadow.c
@@ -27,6 +27,8 @@ void *kmemcheck_shadow_lookup(unsigned long address)
pte = kmemcheck_pte_lookup(address);
if (!pte)
return NULL;
+ if (pte_present(*pte))
+ return NULL;
page = virt_to_page(address);
if (!page->shadow)
--
1.5.6.5
next reply other threads:[~2008-11-24 12:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-24 12:20 Vegard Nossum [this message]
2008-11-24 12:43 ` Pekka Enberg
2008-11-24 15:00 ` Vegard Nossum
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=20081124122013.GA24810@localhost.localdomain \
--to=vegard.nossum@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
--cc=sitsofe@yahoo.com \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®