| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2008 09:36:06 +0300 From: Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com> To: Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com> CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/cpu.c: Move the CPU_DYING notifiers Manfred Spraul wrote: > When a cpu is taken offline, the CPU_DYING notifiers are called on the > dying cpu. According to <linux/notifiers.h>, the cpu should be "not > running any task, not handling interrupts, soon dead". > > For the current implementation, this is not true: > - __cpu_disable can fail. If it fails, then the cpu will remain alive > and happy. > - At least on x86, __cpu_disable() briefly enables the local interrupts > to handle any outstanding interrupts. > > What about moving CPU_DYING down a few lines, behind the __cpu_disable() > line? > There are only two CPU_DYING handlers in the kernel right now: one in > kvm, one in the scheduler. Both should work with the patch applied > [and: I'm not sure if either one handles a failing __cpu_disable()] > > The patch survives simple offlining a cpu. kvm untested due to lack > of a test setup. > > kvm should work with this patch. -- I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too narrow to contain. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists