Re: [PATCHv9 11/16] x86/traps: Communicate a LASS violation in #GP message
From: Kirill A. Shutemov <hidden>
Date: 2025-07-09 09:52:01
Also in:
linux-efi, linux-mm, lkml
On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 11:36:27AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
Hi Kirill, On Wed, 9 Jul 2025 at 11:31, Kirill A. Shutemov [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 07:40:35PM -0700, Sohil Mehta wrote:quoted
quoted
@@ -664,14 +673,23 @@ static enum kernel_gp_hint get_kernel_gp_address(struct pt_regs *regs, return GP_NO_HINT; #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64Might as well get rid of the #ifdef in C code, if possible. if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_64) return GP_CANONICAL; or combine it with the next check.I tried this before. It triggers compiler error on 32-bit: arch/x86/kernel/traps.c:673:16: error: shift count >= width of type [-Werror,-Wshift-count-overflow] 673 | if (*addr >= ~__VIRTUAL_MASK) | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~ __VIRTUAL_MASK is not usable on 32-bit configs.arch/x86/include/asm/page_32_types.h:#define __VIRTUAL_MASK_SHIFT 32 arch/x86/include/asm/page_32_types.h:#define __VIRTUAL_MASK_SHIFT 32 arch/x86/include/asm/page_64_types.h:#define __VIRTUAL_MASK_SHIFT (pgtable_l5_enabled() ? 56 : 47) arch/x86/include/asm/page_types.h:#define __VIRTUAL_MASK ((1UL << __VIRTUAL_MASK_SHIFT) - 1) Given __VIRTUAL_MASK_SHIFT is 32 on 32-bit platforms, perhaps __VIRTUAL_MASK should just be changed to shift 1ULL instead? Or better, use GENMASK(__VIRTUAL_MASK_SHIFT - 1, 0), so the resulting type is still unsigned long.
Making __VIRTUAL_MASK unsigned long long is no-go. Virtual address are unsigned long. I guess GENMASK() would work. I think re-defining __VIRTUAL_MASK is out-of-scope for the patchset. Feel free to prepare a separate patch to do it. -- Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov