linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] genirq: Race condition in ONESHOT IRQ handler disabling IRQ forever

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: <20273.7808.730105.307619@ipc1.ka-ro>
Date:	Tue, 7 Feb 2012 13:52:16 +0100
From:	Lothar Waßmann <LW@...O-electronics.de>
To:	Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [BUG] genirq: Race condition in ONESHOT IRQ handler disabling
 IRQ forever

Hi,

Yong Zhang writes:
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 11:01:06AM +0100, Lothar Waßmann wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > > On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 09:14:47AM +0100, Lothar Waßmann wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > I already sent this to <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> on Feb. 1, 2012
> > > > but did not get any response there. So resending to a wider audience
> > > > with improved subject line:
> > > > 
> > > > there is a race condition in the threaded IRQ handler code for oneshot
> > > > interrupts that may lead to disabling an IRQ indefinitely. IRQs are
> > > > masked before calling the hard-irq handler and are unmasked only after
> > > > the soft-irq handler has been run. Thus if the hard-irq handler
> > > > returns IRQ_HANDLED instead of IRQ_WAKE_THREAD, meaning the soft-irq
> > > > will not be called, the interrupt will remain masked forever.
> > > > 
> > > > This can happen due to a short pulse on the interrupt line, that
> > > > triggers the interrupt logic, but goes undetected by the hard-irq
> > > > handler. The problem can be reproduced with the TSC2007 touch
> > > > controller driver that uses ONESHOT interrupts.
> > > 
> > > Isn't it the responsibility of the driver (say TSC2007)?
> > > 
> > > In this case, TSC2007 should return IRQ_WAKE_THREAD IMHO.
> > > 
> > That would mean it had to return IRQ_WAKE_THREAD unconditionally
> > making the return code useless.
> > And it would cause an extra useless loop through the softirq
> > handler.
> 
> Yeah, it's the default behavior when we introduce 'theadirqs',
> and it's safe.
> 
So, the correct solution would be to remove the check for
IRQ_WAKE_THREAD in handle_irq_event_percpu() and always invoke the
softirq handler?
Note that this problem is not specific to the TSC2007 driver, but may
occur with any hardware.

Or maybe do the unmasking in handle_irq_event() as proposed by
Lars-Peter Clausen in <4F2FAE93.5020205@...afoo.de>?
Like that:
diff --git a/kernel/irq/chip.c b/kernel/irq/chip.c
index f7c543a..fbf68c7 100644
--- a/kernel/irq/chip.c
+++ b/kernel/irq/chip.c
@@ -343,6 +343,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(handle_simple_irq);
 void
 handle_level_irq(unsigned int irq, struct irq_desc *desc)
 {
+	int ret;
+
 	raw_spin_lock(&desc->lock);
 	mask_ack_irq(desc);
 
@@ -360,10 +362,12 @@ handle_level_irq(unsigned int irq, struct irq_desc *desc)
 	if (unlikely(!desc->action || irqd_irq_disabled(&desc->irq_data)))
 		goto out_unlock;
 
-	handle_irq_event(desc);
+	ret = handle_irq_event(desc);
 
-	if (!irqd_irq_disabled(&desc->irq_data) && !(desc->istate & IRQS_ONESHOT))
+	if (!irqd_irq_disabled(&desc->irq_data) &&
+		(!(desc->istate & IRQS_ONESHOT) || ret != IRQ_WAKE_THREAD))
 		unmask_irq(desc);
+
 out_unlock:
 	raw_spin_unlock(&desc->lock);
 }


Lothar Waßmann
-- 
___________________________________________________________

Ka-Ro electronics GmbH | Pascalstraße 22 | D - 52076 Aachen
Phone: +49 2408 1402-0 | Fax: +49 2408 1402-10
Geschäftsführer: Matthias Kaussen
Handelsregistereintrag: Amtsgericht Aachen, HRB 4996

www.karo-electronics.de | info@...o-electronics.de
___________________________________________________________
--
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/