> Alan Cox wrote: > > (The current -ac fix for the double vmalloc races is below. WP test makes it > > more complex than is nice) > > WP test is easy to handle. Just filter out protection violations and > only take the vmalloc path if the page was not found. > > - if (address >= TASK_SIZE && !(error_code & 4)) > + if (address >= TASK_SIZE && !(error_code & 5)) That is nice. I hadn't thought about doing it that way. It still has the problem if %cr2 is corrupted by a vmalloc fault but it cleans up my other code paths nicely. Thanks - 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/
- [PATCH] x86 page fault handler not interrupt safe Brian Gerst
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handler not interrupt s... Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handler not interru... Brian Gerst
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handler not interru... Alan Cox
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handler not int... Brian Gerst
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handler not... Alan Cox
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handle... Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault ha... David Woodhouse
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault ha... Anton Altaparmakov
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault ha... Brian Gerst
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page faul... Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page faul... Nigel Gamble
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page faul... Brian Gerst
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page faul... Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page faul... Brian Gerst
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page faul... Alan Cox