From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S967315AbdADBaV (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 3 Jan 2017 20:30:21 -0500
Received: from mga06.intel.com ([134.134.136.31]:1070 "EHLO mga06.intel.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S967290AbdADBaJ (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 3 Jan 2017 20:30:09 -0500
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,457,1477983600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="804837731"
Message-ID: <1483493407.106950.105.camel@ranerica-desktop>
Subject: Re: [v2 5/7] x86: Add emulation code for UMIP instructions
From: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, linux-msdos@vger.kernel.org,
        wine-devel@winehq.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
        Chen Yucong <slaoub@gmail.com>, Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@mellanox.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>, Huang Rui <ray.huang@amd.com>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        "Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
        Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>,
        "Ravi V . Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        "Liang Z . Li" <liang.z.li@intel.com>,
        Alexandre Julliard <julliard@winehq.org>, Stas Sergeev <stsp@list.ru>
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2017 17:30:07 -0800
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrUDsQTnfmNHbVi5oP-zSToXwB49oXLt4WJ0+hZ2-ZNoRQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20161224013745.108716-1-ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
         <20161224013745.108716-6-ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
         <CALCETrWkL_RumwxcTKaQC=kBKZE4P5u95=OpcPGEjCJfaN9wVA@mail.gmail.com>
         <1482885582.106950.29.camel@ranerica-desktop>
         <CALCETrUZsCGSyd3sf1O7-Sb90w7hewRWunwQXU1x2kZog_aFcA@mail.gmail.com>
         <1483075412.106950.86.camel@ranerica-desktop>
         <CALCETrUDsQTnfmNHbVi5oP-zSToXwB49oXLt4WJ0+hZ2-ZNoRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4-0ubuntu2 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, 2016-12-30 at 18:07 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 9:23 PM, Ricardo Neri
> <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2016-12-27 at 16:48 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >>
> >> >> > +               if (nr_copied  > 0)
> >> >> > +                       return -EFAULT;
> >> >>
> >> >> This should be the only EFAULT case.
> >> > Should this be EFAULT event if the caller cares only about successful
> >> > (return 0) vs failed (return non-0) emulation?
> >>
> >> In theory this particular error would be a page fault not a general
> >> protection fault (in the UMIP off case).  If you were emulating it
> >> extra carefully, you could change the signal accordingly.  But, as I
> >> said, I really doubt this matters.
> >
> > If simple enough and for the sake of accuracy, I could try to issue the
> > page fault. It seems to me that this entitles calling
> > force_sig_info_fault in this particular case as opposed to the
> > force_sig_info(SIGSEGV, SEND_SIG_PRIV, tsk) that do_general_protection
> > calls.
> 
> Sure.  You could even do it by sending the signal in the emulation
> code and returning true.

Will do.

Thanks!
Ricardo
> 
> --Andy