linux-kernel - Re: smp_call_function

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: <CA+55aFxcVNyogK6wc8B6ZjSZk1czwF9XRPc69C_Y52+hUQYSCA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 20 Feb 2015 12:03:03 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	Rafael David Tinoco <inaddy@...ntu.com>,
	Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
	Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Gema Gomez <gema.gomez-solano@...onical.com>,
	Christopher Arges <chris.j.arges@...onical.com>,
	"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: smp_call_function_single lockups

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> I'm not so sure about that aspect: I think disabling IRQs
> might be necessary with some APICs (if lower levels don't
> disable IRQs), to make sure the 'local APIC busy' bit isn't
> set:

Right. But afaik not for the x2apic case, which this is.  The x2apic
doesn't even have a busy bit, and sending the ipi is a single write,

I agree that when doing other apic implementations, we may need to
guarantee atomicity for things like "wait for apic idle, then send the
ipi".

                        Linus
--
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/