linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/17] watchdog: qcom: configure BARK time in addition to BITE time

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: <7B88A165-5D16-4545-85ED-798CA38CF927@codeaurora.org>
Date:	Thu, 24 Mar 2016 14:49:33 -0500
From:	Matthew McClintock <mmcclint@...eaurora.org>
To:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>, andy.gross@...aro.org,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	qca-upstream.external@....qualcomm.com,
	Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>,
	"open list:WATCHDOG DEVICE DRIVERS" <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/17] watchdog: qcom: configure BARK time in addition to BITE time

On Mar 24, 2016, at 11:17 AM, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> 
>>> Why isn't TZ configuring the bark time to what it wants? I'm lost
>>> why we have to do this for them.
>> 
>> So it was done like this to ensure we had a valid upgrade. The bootloader is using the watchdog to ensure the system is bootable and if not it will revert back to the working images.
>> 
>> Bottom line is, for some versions of TZ out there, if we enable watchdog coming out of boot the bark time is already configured by the boot loader and TZ is configured to intercept this interrupt and do some register saving (for crashdump) and we end up getting a watchdog reset during boot.
>> 
>> It’s even a little more complex, because in order for the TZ to save the registers you need to pad the BITE time a bit higher than the BARK time, but I was leaving that for another day.
>> 
> Sounds like an op[timal target for using pretimeout ?

So the bark is basically a pretimeout, sure I think that will work. We can configure it to be off by default.

Thanks for the heads up, I’ll take a look.

-M