linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/PATCH] ARM: smp: Fix cpu_up() racing with sys

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: <503FB836.2060000@codeaurora.org>
Date:	Thu, 30 Aug 2012 12:00:06 -0700
From:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
CC:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] ARM: smp: Fix cpu_up() racing with sys_reboot

On 8/29/2012 4:53 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 09:03:49PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> Nothing stops a process from hotplugging in a CPU concurrently
>> with a sys_reboot() call. In such a situation we could have
>> ipi_cpu_stop() mark a cpu as 'offline' and _cpu_up() ignore the
>> fact that the CPU is not really offline and call the
>> CPU_UP_PREPARE notifier. When this happens stop_machine code will
>> complain that the cpu thread already exists and BUG_ON().
> This puts us at odds with x86, which is a bad thing without first
> investigating whether a generic solution which fixes all arches would
> be more appropriate.

I went this way because it seems that we stop CPUs in architecture
specific code instead of doing it generically (although we have
smp_send_stop()?). It would be nice if we could generalize the cpu
stopping code so that reboot at the architectual level doesn't have to
do this.

>
> A better solution may be to mark those CPUs as being not-present,
> which will prevent them being hot-plugged back.

That sounds fine to me. I can s/active/present/ for v2 if we can get
some kind of consensus. I was also thinking we could stop using these
functions entirely and have some private stopped CPUs map that we check
instead.

-- 
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.

--
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/