Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1658370
| From | Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v7 05/26] x86/mpx: Do not use SIB.base if its value is 101b and ModRM.mod = 0 |
| Date | 2017-06-06 08:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tPfQK-4Zi-13@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tDPZD-5j6-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <tDQ9k-5mF-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <tMsAO-jT-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Mon, 2017-05-29 at 15:07 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 11:17:03AM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote: > > Section 2.2.1.2 of the Intel 64 and IA-32 Architectures Software > > Developer's Manual volume 2A states that when a SIB byte is used and the > > base of the SIB byte points is base = 101b and the mod part > > of the ModRM byte is zero, the base port on the effective address > > computation is null. In this case, a 32-bit displacement follows the SIB > > byte. This is obtained when the instruction decoder parses the operands. > > > > To signal this scenario, a -EDOM error is returned to indicate callers that > > they should ignore the base. > > > > Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> > > Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> > > Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> > > Cc: Adam Buchbinder <adam.buchbinder@gmail.com> > > Cc: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com> > > Cc: Qiaowei Ren <qiaowei.ren@intel.com> > > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> > > Cc: Nathan Howard <liverlint@gmail.com> > > Cc: Adan Hawthorn <adanhawthorn@gmail.com> > > Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> > > Cc: Ravi V. Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com> > > Cc: x86@kernel.org > > Signed-off-by: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com> > > --- > > arch/x86/mm/mpx.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++------- > > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/mpx.c b/arch/x86/mm/mpx.c > > index 7397b81..30aef92 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/mm/mpx.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/mpx.c > > @@ -122,6 +122,15 @@ static int get_reg_offset(struct insn *insn, struct pt_regs *regs, > > > > case REG_TYPE_BASE: > > regno = X86_SIB_BASE(insn->sib.value); > > + /* > > + * If ModRM.mod is 0 and SIB.base == 5, the base of the > > + * register-indirect addressing is 0. In this case, a > > + * 32-bit displacement is expected in this case; the > > + * instruction decoder finds such displacement for us. > > That last sentence reads funny. Just say: > > "In this case, a 32-bit displacement follows the SIB byte." Agreed. I will update the comment to make more sense. Thanks and BR, Ricardo
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH v7 05/26] x86/mpx: Do not use SIB.base if its value is 101b and ModRM.mod = 0 Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> - 2017-05-29 15:10 +0200 Re: [PATCH v7 05/26] x86/mpx: Do not use SIB.base if its value is 101b and ModRM.mod = 0 Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com> - 2017-06-06 08:10 +0200
csiph-web