linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] IRQ: Fix oneshot irq race between irq_finalize_oneshot and handle_level

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:13:39 +0800
From:	Yong Zhang <yong.zhang@...driver.com>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] IRQ: Fix oneshot irq race between
 irq_finalize_oneshot and handle_level_irq

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 09:41:45AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> No, it is _NOT_ harmless. interrupt handlers are guaranteed _NOT_ to
> be reentered. That's why we check the INPROGRESS flag. 
> 
> And you totally miss the case which caused the disussion in the first
> place: When the thread finishes _before_ the hard irq handler on the
> other CPU has set IRQ_MASKED. So this patch solves nothing at all, it
> just makes stuff worse than it was.
> 
> Here is the solution which solves the inconsistent lock state _AND_
> the reentrancy race.
> 
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/tip/linux-2.6-tip.git;a=commit;h=0b1adaa031a55e44f5dd942f234bf09d28e8a0d6
> 
> The change log has a full explanation of the scenarios.

Yeah, I see. Thanks for your point.
It will smooth the concerns.

Thanks,
Yong
--
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/