Re: [OOPS] repeatable 2.4.8-ac7, 2.4.7-ac6 just run xdos

From: Andi Kleen (ak@suse.de)
Date: Wed Aug 22 2001 - 08:22:03 EST


On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 08:11:40AM -0400, Brian Gerst wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 07:57:59AM -0400, Brian Gerst wrote:
> > > Yes. What happened here is that %ds and %es were not being updated
> > > atomically. Under normal operation, this would just leave %es with
> > > USER_DS, which is sufficiently equivalent to KERNEL_DS to not cause a
> > > fault. Coming out of vm86 mode however forces the data segment
> > > registers to null after saving the real mode values on the stack. If an
> > > interrupt happened between setting %ds and %es (what are the odds?) then
> > > that assumption would fail and leave %es null, causing the next string
> > > instruction to go boom. The same fix should be applied to entry.S as
> > > well.
> >
> > No that's not the problem. interrupt gates come in with interrupts off,
> > so there are no other interrupts that could race here. The syscall entry
> > always updates %ds/%es unconditionally and %ds first, so there is no
> > race.
> >
> > It was much simpler. It assumed that __KERNEL_DS could not be loaded
> > from user space because of the segment register priviledge checking; and
> > that was obviously not true from vm86 mode.
> >
> > -Andi
>
> The kernel was initially entered throught the general protection fault
> trap gate, with interupts on. The syscall entry was left on the stack
> because of the way sys_vm86 works.

The GPF handler first sets %ds then %es. Interrupt checks %ds first.
I don't see any race, as soon as %ds is changed the interrupt handler does
the right thing (not reloading), and before that also.

The check I added with the previous patch for ds and es being out of
sync however was also missing from exception handler entry. That probably
caused the crash.

Here is a new patch with both checks.

--- include/asm-i386/hw_irq.h-SEG2 Mon Aug 20 02:54:53 2001
+++ include/asm-i386/hw_irq.h Wed Aug 22 13:02:16 2001
@@ -114,8 +114,10 @@
         "cmpl %eax,7*4(%esp)\n\t" \
         "je 1f\n\t" \
         "movl %eax,%ds\n\t" \
+ "1: cmpl %eax,8*4(%esp)\n\t" \
+ "je 2f\n\t" \
         "movl %eax,%es\n\t" \
- "1:\n\t"
+ "2:\n\t"
 
 #define IRQ_NAME2(nr) nr##_interrupt(void)
 #define IRQ_NAME(nr) IRQ_NAME2(IRQ##nr)
--- arch/i386/kernel/entry.S-SEG2 Sat Aug 18 08:41:53 2001
+++ arch/i386/kernel/entry.S Wed Aug 22 15:07:44 2001
@@ -292,8 +292,11 @@
         cmpl %edx,%ecx
         jz 1f
         movl %edx,%ds
+1: movl %ds,%ecx
+ cmpl $(__KERNEL_DS),%edx
+ jz 2f
         movl %edx,%es
-1: GET_CURRENT(%ebx)
+2: GET_CURRENT(%ebx)
         call *%edi
         addl $8,%esp
         jmp ret_from_exception

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 23 2001 - 21:00:48 EST