On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Jiri Kosina <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> But what if the GPF handler pagefaults afterwards? It'd be operating on >> user stack already. > > So I think this might be the answer. We don't see the GP fault, > because we don't have a backtrace, because that backtrace is on the > user stack (which is why the stack trace dumping fails - we should > probably fix that, btw - the second oops is just confusing and not > helpful). > > Is the intel check for canonical address (that __VIRTUAL_MASK_SHIFT > thing) perhaps wrong or not as strict as Intel CPU's do? We'd never > notice in normal situations..
I explicitly tested that I could blow up the kernel if I intentionally broke that test, and I couldn't blow it up with the test as written. That doesn't prove it's correct, though. --Andy -- 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/
