linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 3/5] Drivers: hv: vmbus: Fix a bug in hv_need_to_signal_on

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: <SN2PR03MB2142F7CF5F102F6302594684A0800@SN2PR03MB2142.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date:	Tue, 22 Mar 2016 00:04:03 +0000
From:	KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>
To:	Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
CC:	"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devel@...uxdriverproject.org" <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
	"olaf@...fle.de" <olaf@...fle.de>,
	"apw@...onical.com" <apw@...onical.com>,
	"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
	"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/5] Drivers: hv: vmbus: Fix a bug in
 hv_need_to_signal_on_read()



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vitaly Kuznetsov [mailto:vkuznets@...hat.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 1:19 AM
> To: KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>
> Cc: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> devel@...uxdriverproject.org; olaf@...fle.de; apw@...onical.com;
> jasowang@...hat.com; stable@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] Drivers: hv: vmbus: Fix a bug in
> hv_need_to_signal_on_read()
> 
> "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com> writes:
> 
> > We need to issue a full memory barrier prior making a signalling
> > decision.
> 
> Any reason this should be mb()? This is pretty strong and will probably
> lead to performace regression ... and, btw, we have another mb() in
> hv_ringbuffer_read().
> 
> Could you please describe the scenarion you're trying to protect against
> so we could search for a better solution?

If the reading of the pend_sz (in the function hv_need_to_signal_on_read)
were to be reordered and read before we commit the new read index we could 
have a problem. If the host were to set the pending_sz after we have sampled pending_sz
and go to sleep before we commit the read index, we could miss sending the interrupt.

Regards,

K. Y