linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/PATCH] arm: do not skip SMP init calls on SMP_ON

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Mon, 30 Nov 2015 11:25:15 +0300
From:	Nikita Yushchenko <nyushchenko@....rtsoft.ru>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
CC:	kuznetsovg@....rtsoft.ru,
	Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
	Mason <slash.tmp@...e.fr>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Paul Kocialkowski <contact@...lk.fr>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Masahiro Yamada <yamada.m@...panasonic.com>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] arm: do not skip SMP init calls on SMP_ON_UP case

28.11.2015 14:13, Nikita Yushchenko пишет:
>>> Not sure I understand logic behind this. With the current code,
>>> resulting cpu_possible_mask depends on CONFIG_SMP_ON_UP:
>>> - if it is set, cpu_possible_mask contains (0 1), as initialized in
>>> arm_dt_init_cpu_maps()
>>> - if it is not set, cpu_possible_mask contains (0), since
>>> imx_smp_init_cpus() removes 1 from there.
>>
>> Right, adding debug to arch/arm/kernel/setup.c, just before the
>> "if (is_smp())" shows:
>>
>> is_smp() 0 possible 3 present 1 online 1
>>
>> which is totally wrong: if is_smp() is false, we should not be setting
>> up any possible CPUs.  See a patch below to fix that.
>>
>> However, this doesn't matter much, because the code in setup.c won't
>> initialise the SMP operations struct ...
> 
> But cpu start code is not the only place in the kernel that uses cpu_present_mask.
> 
> Are you sure that running with invalid cpu_present_mask has no side effects?

At least LTP suite does not like it:
while running /opt/ltp/runtest/cpuhotplug, we see things like the above

<<<test_start>>>
tag=cpuhotplug02 stime=1446628761
cmdline="cpuhotplug02.sh -c 1 -l 1"
contacts=""
analysis=exit
<<<test_output>>>
Name:   cpuhotplug02
Date:   Wed Nov  4 09:19:21 UTC 2015
Desc:   What happens to a process when its CPU is offlined?

CPU is 1
/opt/ltp/testcases/bin/cpuhotplug_hotplug.sh: line 76: echo: write error:
Function not implemented
cpuhotplug02 1 TBROK : CPU1 cannot be onlined
<<<execution_status>>>
initiation_status="ok"
duration=1 termination_type=exited termination_id=2 corefile=no
cutime=4 cstime=6
<<<test_end>>>

--
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/