Re: [PATCH] Add a text_poke syscall v2

[Borislav Petkov]

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 03:04:41PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So sysexit/sysret doesn't count as a serializing instruction, no.
> But it doesn't need to, because *self*-modifying code doesn't need a
> serializing instruction, only a branch. It's only *cross*-modifying
> code that needs a serializing instruction.
>
> So the IPI is sufficient for the cross-modifying case, and the sysret
> is sufficient for the self-modifying case. And we also don't need
> to worry about "what happens if we schedule to another CPU, and
> self-modifying becomes cross-modifying", because the scheduling will
> then do the serializing instruction.
>
> So IPI for other CPU's (limited to the mm-mask) and just a system call
> for local CPU should be perfectly fine.

Cool, so basically an empty dummy syscall IPI-ed to all cores. With a
big fat comment on top.

:-)

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/