linux-hardening - Re: [PATCH] pstore: replace spinlock_t by raw_spinlock

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]

Message-ID: <2024081925-opposite-pessimist-9b98@gregkh>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 19:45:17 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Wen Yang <wen.yang@...ux.dev>
Cc: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	"Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@...lia.com>,
	linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pstore: replace spinlock_t by raw_spinlock_t

On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 10:59:45PM +0800, Wen Yang wrote:
> pstore_dump() is called when both preemption and local IRQ are disabled,
> and a spinlock is obtained, which is problematic for the RT kernel because
> in this configuration, spinlocks are sleep locks.
> 
> Replace the spinlock_t with raw_spinlock_t to avoid sleeping in atomic context.

This feels odd, is it only an out-of-tree RT thing?  Or does this affect
in-kernel code as well?  What prevents any normal spinlock from sleeping
in your system configuration as well?

thanks,

greg k-h