linux-kernel - RE: [RFC][PATCH v3 2/3] Skip spin_locks in panic case and add WARN

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: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28FACE8@ORSMSX104.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Tue, 3 Jan 2012 17:49:13 +0000
From:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To:	Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com>,
	Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
	"Chen, Gong" <gong.chen@...el.com>,
	"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
	"'ying.huang@...el.com'" <'ying.huang@...el.com'>,
	"'ak@...ux.intel.com'" <'ak@...ux.intel.com'>,
	"'hughd@...omium.org'" <'hughd@...omium.org'>,
	"'mingo@...e.hu'" <'mingo@...e.hu'>,
	"jmorris@...ei.org" <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	"a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"namhyung@...il.com" <namhyung@...il.com>,
	"dle-develop@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<dle-develop@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	Satoru Moriya <satoru.moriya@....com>
Subject: RE: [RFC][PATCH v3 2/3] Skip spin_locks in panic case and add
 WARN_ON()

> I'll ask an Intel EFI guru whether I'm on target.

Got a short note back from the EFI people:

----
The reason the paragraph exists in 7.1.1 is that certain services (as listed
in table 31) are guaranteed to work if you call them a second time when you
have taken an exception in trying to execute them already -- say SetVariable()
face plants with an exception...because of the way our code is designed you
can call it a second time even if the first call that took the exception
didn't succeed.

At any rate, I checked with a couple of the other experts around us and none
of us can see any reason to send yourself an NMI just to preface a call to
a UEFI runtime service.  Thus, our collective opinion is that you are correct
in your interpretation.
----

If you want to discuss this more - they apparently have an external mailing
list some place on TianoCore.org. But this seems pretty clear that we don't
need to self-NMI.

-Tony
--
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/