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: <471D0C54.7060207@garzik.org>
Date:	Mon, 22 Oct 2007 16:47:16 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq_flags_t: intro and core annotations

Andrew Morton wrote:
> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

>> > On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> > > We certainly don't want to encourage people to blindly make those
>>> > > conversions ... and I've seen the results of encouraging kernel janitors
>>> > > to do things a certain way.

>> > There's another issue: the "irqsave/irqrestore" versions are much safer 
>> > than the plain "irq" versions, in case the caller already has interrupts 
>> > disabled. 

> It's almost always a bug to do spin_lock_irq() when local interrupts are
> disabled.


Let me add to the chorus of voices:  I continually see two cases where 
real bugs crop up:

1) hacker uses spin_lock_irq() in incorrect context (where it is not 
safe to do a blind enable/disable)

2) hacker uses spin_lock_irq() correctly, but the surrounding code 
changes, thus invalidating prior assumptions.

I would even go so far as to support the drastic measure of deleting 
spin_lock_irq().

spin_lock_irqsave() generates fewer bugs, is more future-proof, and by 
virtue of 'flags' permits architectures a bit more flexibility.

	Jeff



-
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ