Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1270795
| From | Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | [PATCH 24/37] x86, pkeys: dump PKRU with other kernel registers |
| Date | 2015-11-17 04:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qvFhE-7YL-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qvFhE-7YL-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> I'm a bit ambivalent about whether this is needed or not. Protection Keys never affect kernel mappings. But, they can affect whether the kernel will fault when it touches a user mapping. But, the kernel doesn't touch user mappings without some careful choreography and these accesses don't generally result in oopses. Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> --- b/arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff -puN arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c~pkeys-30-kernel-error-dumps arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c --- a/arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c~pkeys-30-kernel-error-dumps 2015-11-16 12:35:46.445675988 -0800 +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c 2015-11-16 12:35:46.449676170 -0800 @@ -116,6 +116,8 @@ void __show_regs(struct pt_regs *regs, i printk(KERN_DEFAULT "DR0: %016lx DR1: %016lx DR2: %016lx\n", d0, d1, d2); printk(KERN_DEFAULT "DR3: %016lx DR6: %016lx DR7: %016lx\n", d3, d6, d7); + if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_OSPKE)) + printk(KERN_DEFAULT "PKRU: %08x\n", read_pkru()); } void release_thread(struct task_struct *dead_task) _ -- 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/
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 24/37] x86, pkeys: dump PKRU with other kernel registers Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net> - 2015-11-17 04:40 +0100
csiph-web