Re: [patch 15/14] x86/dumpstack/64: Speedup in_exception_stack()

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > On Apr 2, 2019, at 1:29 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> How about a much better fix: make the DB stack be the same size as all
> >>> the others and just have 4 of them (DB0, DB1, DB2, and DB3.  After all,
> >>> overflowing from one debug stack into another is just as much of a bug as
> >>> overflowing into a different IST stack.
> >> 
> >> That makes sense.
> > 
> > Except that we just have two not four.
> > 
> > It needs some tweaking of the ist_shift stuff in entry_64.S but that's not
> > rocket science. Famous last words....
> > 
> 
> The ist_shift mess should probably be in C, but thatâs a big can of
> worms. That being said, why do we have it at all?  Once upon a time, weâd
> do ICEBP from user mode (or a legit breakpoint), then send a signal and
> hit a data breakpoint, and weâd recurse.  But we donât run user debug
> handlers on the IST stack at all anymore.
>
> Maybe we can convince ourselves itâs safe?

Maybe. Need to think about it for a while.

Thanks,

	tglx