linux-kernel - Re: nmi_watchdog suspicious

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

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.55.0806210250210.19614@cliff.in.clinika.pl>
Date:	Sat, 21 Jun 2008 02:54:38 +0100 (BST)
From:	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>
To:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: nmi_watchdog suspicious

On Wed, 18 Jun 2008, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:

> If you mean the case we get NMI physical line assetred while configuring APIC
> (ie nmi watchdog is not properly configured yet) then I wonder why we has
> this checking at all...

 Hmm, I am not sure what you mean -- nmi_watchdog_tick() can be called
potentially at any time, and you can receive NMIs from sources other than
the watchdog; the latters would set bits in the Port B at 0x61 in most
cases though.  Anyway using a separate variable such as
"nmi_watchdog_active" would be cleaner.

  Maciej
--
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/