On 6/24/20 11:24 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
>> Von: "Kees Cook" <keesc...@chromium.org>
>> An: "Randy Dunlap" <rdun...@infradead.org>
>> CC: "Richard Weinberger" <richard.weinber...@gmail.com>, "richard" 
>> <rich...@nod.at>, "Greg Kroah-Hartman"
>> <gre...@linuxfoundation.org>, "Prasad Sodagudi" <psoda...@codeaurora.org>, 
>> "Sami Tolvanen" <samitolva...@google.com>,
>> "Amit Daniel Kachhap" <amit.kach...@arm.com>, "linux-kselftest" 
>> <linux-kselft...@vger.kernel.org>, "clang-built-linux"
>> <clang-built-li...@googlegroups.com>, "linux-kernel" 
>> <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 25. Juni 2020 08:06:18
>> Betreff: Re: [PATCH drivers/misc 0/4] lkdtm: Various clean ups
> 
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 06:45:47PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>> Looks like lkdtm/bugs.c needs to get/use arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h
>>> but it actually uses arch/x86/um/asm/processor*.h, which does not have the
>>> needed structs etc.
>>
>> Should I just test for !UML in bugs.c? (This is all for the
>> lkdtm_DOUBLE_FAULT() test.) I already do those kinds of checks for the
>> lkdtm_UNSET_SMEP() test. e.g.:
> 
> Just had a look. Yes, this sounds good to me. UML has CONFIG_X86_32=y but no 
> GDT. :-)

Sounds good to me also. Thanks.

-- 
~Randy

Reply via email to