Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86/entry/64: Move #BP from IST to the IRQ stack

2015-07-24 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 03:37:48PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > There's nothing IST-worthy about #BP/int3. We don't allow kprobes > in the small handful of places in the kernel that run at CPL0 with > an invalid stack, and 32-bit kernels have used normal interrupt > gates for #BP forever. > >

Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86/entry/64: Move #BP from IST to the IRQ stack

2015-07-24 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 03:37:48PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: There's nothing IST-worthy about #BP/int3. We don't allow kprobes in the small handful of places in the kernel that run at CPL0 with an invalid stack, and 32-bit kernels have used normal interrupt gates for #BP forever.

[PATCH 3/3] x86/entry/64: Move #BP from IST to the IRQ stack

2015-07-23 Thread Andy Lutomirski
There's nothing IST-worthy about #BP/int3. We don't allow kprobes in the small handful of places in the kernel that run at CPL0 with an invalid stack, and 32-bit kernels have used normal interrupt gates for #BP forever. Furthermore, we don't allow kprobes in places that have usergs while in

[PATCH 3/3] x86/entry/64: Move #BP from IST to the IRQ stack

2015-07-23 Thread Andy Lutomirski
There's nothing IST-worthy about #BP/int3. We don't allow kprobes in the small handful of places in the kernel that run at CPL0 with an invalid stack, and 32-bit kernels have used normal interrupt gates for #BP forever. Furthermore, we don't allow kprobes in places that have usergs while in