From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754499AbcHSBf7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2016 21:35:59 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0065.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.65]:56088 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753878AbcHSBf5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2016 21:35:57 -0400 X-Session-Marker: 726F737465647440676F6F646D69732E6F7267 X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,rostedt@goodmis.org,:::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:599:800:960:973:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1538:1568:1593:1594:1711:1714:1730:1747:1777:1792:2393:2553:2559:2562:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3622:3865:3867:3870:3872:3874:4250:5007:6261:7875:7903:10004:10400:10450:10455:10848:10967:11232:11658:11914:12517:12519:12740:13069:13311:13357:13439:14181:14659:14721:19904:19999:21080:30041:30051:30054:30090:30091,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0,LFtime:1,LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: roof97_7767ca872aa5f X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1328 Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:56:58 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: LKML , Jiri Olsa Subject: Re: Question: Outer NMI can nest if from user mode? Message-ID: <20160818115658.2a875069@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20160818114845.24e0473e@gandalf.local.home> References: <20160818112155.634bebcb@gandalf.local.home> <20160818114845.24e0473e@gandalf.local.home> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.2 (GTK+ 2.24.30; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:48:45 -0400 Steven Rostedt wrote: > 9b6e6a8334d56 x86/nmi/64: Switch stacks on userspace NMI entry > > Which switches the stack to the kernel stack from the NMI stack if we > came from user mode. That explains how the asm glue wont catch it. In my own defense, the commit that added the comment came before the stack switch commit, making the comment incorrect at the time it was added ;-) -- Steve