linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] usb: otg: twl4030-usb: spin_unlock

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]

Message-ID: <50264287.9000900@gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 11 Aug 2012 15:31:19 +0400
From:	Denis <yefremov.denis@...il.com>
To:	balbi@...com
CC:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: otg: twl4030-usb: spin_unlock_irq in interrupt handler

On 09.08.2012 13:37, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have pushed a patch which I think solves this issue. Can you test ?
Hi,
my patch is unneeded since this is a threaded interrupt handler. And it 
runs with
interrupt line masked globally on the controller(because of IRQF_ONESHOT).
And I think that "sti" instruction can't reenable this line because it 
is cpu related.
The point was that if "local_irq_enable" is called in primary irq 
handler or in
request_irq handler you reenables (maybe accidentally) interrupts on the 
cpu.
Because after patch https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/3/25/434 these handlers 
runs with
interrupts disabled.
Some time ago our static tool didn't make any difference between 
ordinary and
threaded interrupts handlers. At that time I didn't know it and didn't 
check the
code enough. So it was a false positive.
--
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/