On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 2:02 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> > On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> >> 2017-12-15 17:51 GMT+08:00 David Hildenbrand :
>> >>>
>> int main()
>> {
>>
* Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 2:02 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >> 2017-12-15 17:51 GMT+08:00 David Hildenbrand :
> >>>
> int main()
> {
> int fd = open("/dev/kvm", 0x80102ul);
> int vm = ioctl(f
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 2:02 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> 2017-12-15 17:51 GMT+08:00 David Hildenbrand :
>>>
int main()
{
int fd = open("/dev/kvm", 0x80102ul);
int vm = ioctl(fd, KVM_CREATE_VM, 0);
int cpu = ioct
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> 2017-12-15 17:51 GMT+08:00 David Hildenbrand :
>>
>>> int main()
>>> {
>>> int fd = open("/dev/kvm", 0x80102ul);
>>> int vm = ioctl(fd, KVM_CREATE_VM, 0);
>>> int cpu = ioctl(vm, KVM_CREATE_VCPU, 4);
>>
>> Not even a memory region :) So
2017-12-15 17:51 GMT+08:00 David Hildenbrand :
>
>> int main()
>> {
>> int fd = open("/dev/kvm", 0x80102ul);
>> int vm = ioctl(fd, KVM_CREATE_VM, 0);
>> int cpu = ioctl(vm, KVM_CREATE_VCPU, 4);
>
> Not even a memory region :) So maybe the first memory access directly
> triggers a fault?
>
>>
> int main()
> {
> int fd = open("/dev/kvm", 0x80102ul);
> int vm = ioctl(fd, KVM_CREATE_VM, 0);
> int cpu = ioctl(vm, KVM_CREATE_VCPU, 4);
Not even a memory region :) So maybe the first memory access directly
triggers a fault?
> ioctl(cpu, KVM_RUN, 0);
> return 0;
> }
>
> And, yes,
On Fri, 15 Dec 2017, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> I've built this exact kernel and here is __switch_to disasm:
> https://gist.githubusercontent.com/dvyukov/8137559f7da08fbe32f9018972a4498c/raw/0ef2abf723b117f0d0f0306fd50e216d50c5cecb/gistfile1.txt
>
> __switch_to+0x95b seems to point to (?):
>
> ff
2017-12-15 17:38 GMT+08:00 Dmitry Vyukov :
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 10:39 PM, Linus Torvalds
>>> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Thu
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 10:39 PM, Linus Torvalds
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Linus Torvalds
w
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 10:39 PM, Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Linus Torvalds
>>> wrote:
I don't think that's the case. "int3" is entirely sy
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 10:39 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Linus Torvalds
>> wrote:
>>> I don't think that's the case. "int3" is entirely synchronous, and
>>> doesn't have the same odd issues as a breakpo
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
>> I don't think that's the case. "int3" is entirely synchronous, and
>> doesn't have the same odd issues as a breakpoint trap (which honors RF
>> etc). It's literally just a one-by
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> 2. It actually tries to handle the breakpoint. A breakpoint is a
>> benign exception, so any exception encountered while delivering it
>> would result in serial delivery.
>
>
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> 2. It actually tries to handle the breakpoint. A breakpoint is a
> benign exception, so any exception encountered while delivering it
> would result in serial delivery.
I don't think that's the case. "int3" is entirely synchronous, and
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Sun, 3 Dec 2017, syzbot wrote:
>>> BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at fff8
>>> Oops: 0002 [#1] SMP KASAN
>
> System write of a non-existent page.
>
>>> R
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Dec 2017, syzbot wrote:
>> BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at fff8
>> Oops: 0002 [#1] SMP KASAN
System write of a non-existent page.
>> RIP: 0010:switch_fpu_prepare arch/x86/include/asm/fpu/internal.h:535
On Sun, 3 Dec 2017, syzbot wrote:
> BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at fff8
> IP: switch_fpu_prepare arch/x86/include/asm/fpu/internal.h:535 [inline]
> IP: __switch_to+0x95b/0x1330 arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c:407
> PGD 5e28067 P4D 5e28067 PUD 5e2a067 PMD 0
> Oops: 0002 [#1]
17 matches
Mail list logo
