linux-kernel - Re: Interesting csd deadlock on ARC

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: <20160223103950.GJ6356@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Tue, 23 Feb 2016 11:39:50 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
Cc:	"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Noam Camus <noamc@...hip.com>,
	arcml <linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: Interesting csd deadlock on ARC

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 03:51:23PM +0530, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> > 
> > Now the distinct difference between arch_irq_work_raise() and
> > arch_send_call_function_single_ipi() is that arch_irq_work_raise()
> > should be NMI-safe.
> 
> Ok - so when I implement interrupt priorities (aka NMI for ARC), this needs to be
> highest.

So on x86 the issue is that the NMI can interrupt someone else writing
to the lapic. So there's a bit of extra care to be taken.

If your platform doesn't suffer such issues, then that should be fine.

The only requirement for irq_work is that it runs after the NMI
completes and runs from regular IRQ context. There are no strict
interrupt priority requirements, only that it happens.

> > I seem to have forgotten the status of NMIs on ARC, but this is
> > something to make a note of.
> 
> Not had a chance to go back to it since we last discussed.
> I've just been swamped with bug fixing like this one :-(

Yeah, I'm familiar with the problem ...