Philipp Kohlbecher wrote: > From: Philipp Kohlbecher <pk031698@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > The kernel_execve function issues a software interrupt (int 0x80) to make > a system call to sys_execve. This function expects to find the stack segment > and stack pointer of the function that issued the system call in the pt_regs > struct. The syscall entry code that sets up this struct expects the stack > segment and the stack pointer of the issuing function already on the stack. > But the Intel processor saves these registers only if a stack-switch occurs, > i.e. for inter-privilege interrupts and exceptions (cf. Intel Software > Developer’s Manual, Vol. 3A, p. 5-17, > http://www.intel.com/design/processor/manuals/253668.pdf). > For an intra-privilege interrupt like the one issued in kernel_execve, these > registers must be saved manually. > Could you describe the failure scenario this causes? I'm trying to understand how something that fundamental would have possibly slipped by testing? -hpa - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-assembly" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.21.1] i386: save registers before intra-privilege syscall
- From: Philipp Kohlbecher
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.21.1] i386: save registers before intra-privilege syscall
- References:
- [PATCH 2.6.21.1] i386: save registers before intra-privilege syscall
- From: Philipp Kohlbecher
- [PATCH 2.6.21.1] i386: save registers before intra-privilege syscall
- Prev by Date: Re: why overflow flag being set?
- Next by Date: [PATCH 2.6.21.1] i386: save registers before intra-privilege syscall
- Previous by thread: [PATCH 2.6.21.1] i386: save registers before intra-privilege syscall
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 2.6.21.1] i386: save registers before intra-privilege syscall
- Index(es):
![]() |