Commit e5c460f4 authored by David S. Miller's avatar David S. Miller

sparc64: Don't bark so loudly about 32-bit tasks generating 64-bit fault addresses.

This was found using Dave Jone's trinity tool.

When a user process which is 32-bit performs a load or a store, the
cpu chops off the top 32-bits of the effective address before
translating it.

This is because we run 32-bit tasks with the PSTATE_AM (address
masking) bit set.

We can't run the kernel with that bit set, so when the kernel accesses
userspace no address masking occurs.

Since a 32-bit process will have no mappings in that region we will
properly fault, so we don't try to handle this using access_ok(),
which can safely just be a NOP on sparc64.

Real faults from 32-bit processes should never generate such addresses
so a bug check was added long ago, and it barks in the logs if this
happens.

But it also barks when a kernel user access causes this condition, and
that _can_ happen.  For example, if a pointer passed into a system call
is "0xfffffffc" and the kernel access 4 bytes offset from that pointer.

Just handle such faults normally via the exception entries.
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
parent 256cf4c4
......@@ -281,18 +281,6 @@ static void noinline __kprobes bogus_32bit_fault_tpc(struct pt_regs *regs)
show_regs(regs);
}
static void noinline __kprobes bogus_32bit_fault_address(struct pt_regs *regs,
unsigned long addr)
{
static int times;
if (times++ < 10)
printk(KERN_ERR "FAULT[%s:%d]: 32-bit process "
"reports 64-bit fault address [%lx]\n",
current->comm, current->pid, addr);
show_regs(regs);
}
asmlinkage void __kprobes do_sparc64_fault(struct pt_regs *regs)
{
enum ctx_state prev_state = exception_enter();
......@@ -322,10 +310,8 @@ asmlinkage void __kprobes do_sparc64_fault(struct pt_regs *regs)
goto intr_or_no_mm;
}
}
if (unlikely((address >> 32) != 0)) {
bogus_32bit_fault_address(regs, address);
if (unlikely((address >> 32) != 0))
goto intr_or_no_mm;
}
}
if (regs->tstate & TSTATE_PRIV) {
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment