Re: [PATCH v7 16/26] x86/insn-eval: Support both signed 32-bit and 64-bit effective addresses

I am sorry Boris, while working on this series I missed a few of your feedback comments. On Wed, 2017-06-07 at 17:48 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 11:17:14AM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote: > > The 32-bit and 64-bit address encodings are identical. This means that we > > can

Re: [PATCH v7 22/26] x86/umip: Force a page fault when unable to copy emulated result to user

On Fri, 2017-06-09 at 13:02 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 11:17:20AM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote: > > fixup_umip_exception() will be called from do_general_protection. If the > ^ >

Re: [PATCH v7 23/26] x86/traps: Fixup general protection faults caused by UMIP

I am sorry Boris, I also missed this feedback. On Fri, 2017-06-09 at 15:02 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 11:17:21AM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote: > > If the User-Mode Instruction Prevention CPU feature is available and > > enabled, a general protection fault will be issued

Re: [PATCH v7 24/26] x86: Enable User-Mode Instruction Prevention

On Fri, 2017-06-09 at 18:10 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 11:17:22AM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote: > > User_mode Instruction Prevention (UMIP) is enabled by setting/clearing a > > bit in %cr4. > > > > It makes sense to enable UMIP at some point while booting, before user >