linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86, fix x86 fixup

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5317ABD5.80908@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 05 Mar 2014 17:57:25 -0500
From:	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	Rui Wang <rui.y.wang@...el.com>,
	Liu Ping Fan <kernelfans@...il.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Yoshihiro YUNOMAE <yoshihiro.yunomae.ez@...achi.com>,
	Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>,
	Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com>,
	Yang Zhang <yang.z.zhang@...el.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	"Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Li Fei <fei.li@...el.com>, gong.chen@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, fix x86 fixup_irqs() error handling



On 03/05/2014 04:09 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2014, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> 
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c b/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
>> index d99f31d..55fab61 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
>> @@ -351,6 +351,7 @@ void fixup_irqs(void)
>>  	struct irq_desc *desc;
>>  	struct irq_data *data;
>>  	struct irq_chip *chip;
>> +	int ret;
>>  
>>  	for_each_irq_desc(irq, desc) {
>>  		int break_affinity = 0;
>> @@ -389,8 +390,12 @@ void fixup_irqs(void)
>>  		if (!irqd_can_move_in_process_context(data) && chip->irq_mask)
>>  			chip->irq_mask(data);
>>  
>> -		if (chip->irq_set_affinity)
>> -			chip->irq_set_affinity(data, affinity, true);
>> +		if (chip->irq_set_affinity) {
>> +			ret = chip->irq_set_affinity(data, affinity, true);
>> +			WARN(ret == -ENOSPC,
>> +			     "IRQ %d set affinity failed with %d.  The device assigned to this IRQ is unstable.\n",
>> +			     irq, ret);
> 
> Should this be WARN_ON_ONCE() to avoid filling the kernel log instead?

The problem is that it could hit multiple IRQs ... maybe pr_crit might be better
here so we don't flood the log with an unnecessary stack trace; anyone with the
source can figure out what the call path is.


> 
> It doesn't make much sense to print out the negative return value, maybe 
> you meant to print -ret instead?

Heh :)  You're right.  I'll fix that too.

P.

> 
>> +		}
>>  		else if (!(warned++))
>>  			set_affinity = 0;
>>  
--
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/