On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 08:00:41PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> I'll redo the whole games tomorrow.
Ok I can't reproduce today either. Let's ascribe it to this particular
test box being funny or something in 3.19-rcs.
We can look at it if it happens again.
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Bori
On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 10:43:57AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> Sure, but the code would be simpler if we shoved that value in the
> EFLAGS slot.
There probably is some reason for that but it's not like we can change
it :-)
> Hmm. I added and pushed a test for fork, but that didn't turn
> any
On Jan 6, 2015 7:34 AM, "Borislav Petkov" wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 12:31:15PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > Do you have context tracking on?
>
> Yap, it is enabled for whatever reason:
> CONFIG_CONTEXT_TRACKING=y
> CONFIG_CONTEXT_TRACKING_FORCE=y
> CONFIG_HAVE_CONTEXT_TRACKING=y
I'l
On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 12:31:15PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> Do you have context tracking on?
Yap, it is enabled for whatever reason:
CONFIG_CONTEXT_TRACKING=y
CONFIG_CONTEXT_TRACKING_FORCE=y
CONFIG_HAVE_CONTEXT_TRACKING=y
> I assume that's in the historical tree?
Yeah.
> > [ 180.059170]
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 4:59 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 03:58:17PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> The int_ret_from_sys_call and syscall tracing code disagrees with
>> the sysret path as to the value of RCX.
>>
>> The Intel SDM, the AMD APM, and my laptop all agree that s
On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 03:58:17PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> The int_ret_from_sys_call and syscall tracing code disagrees with
> the sysret path as to the value of RCX.
>
> The Intel SDM, the AMD APM, and my laptop all agree that sysret
> returns with RCX == RIP. The syscall tracing code do
