linux-kernel - [PATCH] warn about shared irqs requesting IRQF_DISABLED registered with setup

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

Message-Id: <1259356206-14843-1-git-send-email-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Date:	Fri, 27 Nov 2009 22:10:06 +0100
From:	Uwe Kleine-König 
	<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	David Brownell <dbrownell@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Nicolas Pitre <nico@...vell.com>,
	Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@...il.com>,
	John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] warn about shared irqs requesting IRQF_DISABLED registered with setup_irq

IRQF_DISABLED is not guaranteed on shared irqs.  There is already a
warning in place for irqs registered with request_irq (introduced in
470c66239ef03).  Move it to __setup_irq, this way it triggers for both
request_irq and setup_irq.

One irq that is now warned about is the timer tick on at91 (ARCH=arm).

Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
Cc: David Brownell <dbrownell@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nico@...vell.com>
Cc: Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@...il.com>
Cc: John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc: Remy Bohmer <linux@...mer.net>,
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
Cc: Andrea Gallo <andrea.gallo@...ricsson.com>,
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
---
 kernel/irq/manage.c |   26 +++++++++++++-------------
 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c
index bde4c66..59f4b54 100644
--- a/kernel/irq/manage.c
+++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c
@@ -613,6 +613,19 @@ __setup_irq(unsigned int irq, struct irq_desc *desc, struct irqaction *new)
 	int nested, shared = 0;
 	int ret;
 
+	/*
+	 * handle_IRQ_event() always ignores IRQF_DISABLED except for
+	 * the _first_ irqaction (sigh).  That can cause oopsing, but
+	 * the behavior is classified as "will not fix" so we need to
+	 * start nudging drivers away from using that idiom.
+	 */
+	if ((new->flags & (IRQF_SHARED|IRQF_DISABLED)) ==
+					(IRQF_SHARED|IRQF_DISABLED)) {
+		pr_warning(
+		  "IRQ %d/%s: IRQF_DISABLED is not guaranteed on shared IRQs\n",
+			irq, new->name);
+	}
+
 	if (!desc)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
@@ -1008,19 +1021,6 @@ int request_threaded_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
 	struct irq_desc *desc;
 	int retval;
 
-	/*
-	 * handle_IRQ_event() always ignores IRQF_DISABLED except for
-	 * the _first_ irqaction (sigh).  That can cause oopsing, but
-	 * the behavior is classified as "will not fix" so we need to
-	 * start nudging drivers away from using that idiom.
-	 */
-	if ((irqflags & (IRQF_SHARED|IRQF_DISABLED)) ==
-					(IRQF_SHARED|IRQF_DISABLED)) {
-		pr_warning(
-		  "IRQ %d/%s: IRQF_DISABLED is not guaranteed on shared IRQs\n",
-			irq, devname);
-	}
-
 #ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP
 	/*
 	 * Lockdep wants atomic interrupt handlers:
-- 
1.6.5.2

--
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/