linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] irq: move some interrupt arch_* functions into struct irq

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:11:59 -0800
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>
Cc:	"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	"x86\@kernel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	"linuxppc-dev\@ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irq: move some interrupt arch_* functions into struct irq_chip.

Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com> writes:

> On Wed, 2010-03-10 at 17:18 +0000, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com> writes:
>> 
>> > On Wed, 2010-03-10 at 10:55 +0000, ijc@...lion.org.uk wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> arch_init_chip_data cannot be moved into struct irq_chip at this time
>> >> because irq_desc->chip is not known at the time the irq_desc is
>> >> setup. For now rename arch_init_chip_data to arch_init_irq_desc (for
>> >> PowerPC, the only other user, whose usage better matches the new name)
>> >> and on x86 convert arch_init_chip_data to ioapic_init_chip_data and
>> >> call this whenever the IO APIC code allocates a new IRQ.
>> >
>> > One idea I had to improve this was to add a struct irq_chip * as a
>> > parameter to irq_to_desc_alloc_node. The new parameter potentially could
>> > be NULL for current behaviour. Does that sound like a reasonable
>> > approach?
>> 
>> I don't follow why we have the restriction that irq_to_desc_alloc_node
>> must call arch_init_chip_data.  Assuming that requirement to call arch_init_chip_data
>> is valid, passing something into init_one_irq_desc seems appropriate.
>
> Yes, I suspect that could also be made to work.
>
> The lifecycle of the irq_desc and chip_data isn't really clear to me --
> I guess once allocated an irq_desc never gets freed (at least
> currently)? The associated chip_data can be freed on migrate and
> replaced with a new one, but is not freed otherwise.

Yes.  That actually looks like a bug.

> My concern is that if the caller asks for an IRQ which already exists
> (is that valid?) then you will get that existing irq_desc back,
> including its existing chip_data, which potentially leaks the new one
> which was passed in. Or is it the case that the only way this could
> happen would be for legacy IRQs? In which case perhaps it is simply
> invalid to pass a new chip data in for such an IRQ.

The only irqs that should be allocated/freed are probably the msi
irqs as those are the only ones that dynamically come and go in the
system.

Unfortunately there appears to be a bigger mess here than first appeared.

Eric
--
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/