Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handler not interrupt safe

[Alan Cox]

> On Mon, 7 May 2001, Brian Gerst wrote:
> >
> > Keep in mind that regs->eflags could be from user space, and could have
> > some undesirable flags set.  That's why I did a test/sti instead of
> > reloading eflags.  Plus my patch leaves interrupts disabled for the
> > minimum time possible.
> 
> The plain "popf" should be ok: the way intel works, you cannot actually
> use popf to set any of the strange flags (if vm86 mode etc).
> 
> I like the size of this alternate patch.

I dont see where the alternative patch ensures the user didnt flip the
direction flag for one

-
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/