[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFx=wdH4v7cD2F5Kq+jwDfV5cz9qTANgOwpMTC3MY=99AQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 11:11:47 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>, Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/13] Virtually mapped stacks with guard pages (x86, core)
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> And in particular, the init_task stack initialization initialized it
> to the init_thread pointer. Which was definitely deadly.
>
> Let's see if that was it..
No, it's still broken. But it's *less* broken, so here's a new version
of the patch that at least gets some of the stack setup right, in my
hope that somebody will bother to look at this, and being less broken
might mean that somebody sees what else I missed..
Linus
View attachment "patch.diff" of type "text/plain" (24204 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
