linux-kernel - irq_fpu_usable() is irreliable

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 17 Nov 2015 12:39:45 +0100
From:	"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To:	tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: irq_fpu_usable() is irreliable

Hi folks,

The availability of the FPU in kernel space, as you know, is
determined by this function:

bool irq_fpu_usable(void)
{
        return !in_interrupt() ||
                interrupted_user_mode() ||
                interrupted_kernel_fpu_idle();
}

My understanding is that the first check is !in_interrupt(), because
if `current` is valid - if we are in process context - then we have a
place to store the existing FPU regs in kernel_fpu_begin, to be
restored later in kernel_fpu_end. Recently I've been tracking down a
problem in which irq_fpu_usable() returns false, yet a stack trace
shows the first function is the syscall entry point. This leads me to
believe that in_interrupt() is not an adequate way of testing for a
valid `current`. In my particular problematic case, the reason
in_interrupt() was returning false is because a number of
rcu_read_lock_bh()s were being held; IOW this is occurring in the
ndo_start_xmit path of a network driver.

I therefore propose changing the function to this:

bool irq_fpu_usable(void)
{
        return (!in_irq() && !in_nmi()) ||
                interrupted_user_mode() ||
                interrupted_kernel_fpu_idle();
}

What would you think of that?

Thanks,
Jason
--
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/