linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Prevent nested interrupts when the IRQ stack is near overflowing v2

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: <20100325115934.425e15f0@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date:	Thu, 25 Mar 2010 11:59:34 +0000
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, x86@...nel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Prevent nested interrupts when the IRQ stack is near
 overflowing v2

> time. What's the point of running it with interrupts enabled ?

The underlying question you posed was why don't we kill off the running
with irqs enabled cases. That requires more work but should definitely
happen.

> Nothing, we just run into stack overflow problems. So what's better:
> an unreliable and ugly hackaround or just avoiding the possible stack
> overflow in the first place ?

I think you are trying to have a debate when we are in agreement anyway.
I don't btw think the workaround is 'unreliable', ugly as sin yes but the
logic appears sound.

Alan
--
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/