linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] ARM: add basic support for on-demand backtrace of other CPUs

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: <55A775B6.8080505@linaro.org>
Date:	Thu, 16 Jul 2015 10:13:26 +0100
From:	Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
To:	Russell King <rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, x86@...nel.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ARM: add basic support for on-demand backtrace of
 other CPUs

On 15/07/15 21:39, Russell King wrote:
> As we now have generic infrastructure to support backtracing of other
> CPUs in the system on lockups, we can start to implement this for ARM.
> Initially, we add an IPI based implementation, as the GIC code needs
> modification to support the generation of FIQ IPIs, and not all ARM
> platforms have the ability to raise a FIQ in the non-secure world.
>
> This provides us with a "best efforts" implementation in the absence
> of FIQs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk>
> ---
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c
> index 90dfbedfbfb8..3a20c386fd33 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>   #include <linux/cpu.h>
>   #include <linux/seq_file.h>
>   #include <linux/irq.h>
> +#include <linux/nmi.h>
>   #include <linux/percpu.h>
>   #include <linux/clockchips.h>
>   #include <linux/completion.h>
> @@ -72,6 +73,7 @@ enum ipi_msg_type {
>   	IPI_CPU_STOP,
>   	IPI_IRQ_WORK,
>   	IPI_COMPLETION,
> +	IPI_CPU_BACKTRACE = 15,

Even with the potential for (eventually) being signalled by FIQ, is this 
IPI really so special it needs to be placed outside the scope of NR_IPI 
and the accounting and tracing support it brings with it?
--
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/