linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] eventfd: allow atomic read and waitqueue remove

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: <20100121172336.GA16707@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 21 Jan 2010 19:23:37 +0200
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc:	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>, mtosatti@...hat.com,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] eventfd: allow atomic read and waitqueue remove

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 07:13:13PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 01/21/2010 06:58 PM, Davide Libenzi wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Jan 2010, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>
>>    
>>> This is a backport of commit: 03db343a6320f780937078433fa7d8da955e6fce
>>> modified in a way that introduces some code duplication on the one hand,
>>> but reduces the risk of regressing existing eventfd users on the other
>>> hand.
>>>
>>> KVM needs a wait to atomically remove themselves from the eventfd
>>> ->poll() wait queue head, in order to handle correctly their IRQfd
>>> deassign operation.
>>>
>>> This patch introduces such API, plus a way to read an eventfd from its
>>> context.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin<mst@...hat.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Avi, Davidel, how about only including the following part for -stable
>>> then?  Reason is, I still would like to be able to use irqfd there, and
>>> getting spurious interrupts 100% of times unmask is done isn't a very
>>> good idea IMO ...
>>>      
>> It's the same thing. Unless there are *real* problems in KVM due to the
>> spurious ints, I still think this is .33 material.
>>    
>
> I agree.
>
> But I think we can solve this in another way in .32: we can clear the  
> eventfd from irqfd->inject work, which is in process context.  The new  
> stuff is only needed for lockless clearing, no?

No, AFAIK there's no way to clear the counter from kernel without
this patch.

> -- 
> Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
--
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/