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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Thu, 6 Mar 2014 11:22:32 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
cc:	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	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 Wed, 5 Mar 2014, 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?
> 
> It doesn't make much sense to print out the negative return value, maybe 
> you meant to print -ret instead?

Well, that does not make sense either. We only print if ret == -ENOSPC!
 
> > +		}
> >  		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/