linux-kernel - Re: Regression: Failed boots bisected to 4cd13c21b207 "softirq: Let ksoftirqd do its job"

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: <20161116210139.GB21156@e106950-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Nov 2016 21:01:40 +0000
From:   Brian Starkey <brian.starkey@....com>
To:     Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: Regression: Failed boots bisected to 4cd13c21b207 "softirq: Let
 ksoftirqd do its job"

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:49:06AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Brian Starkey <brian.starkey@....com> wrote:
>
>>
>> The smc91x driver does seem to have some trickiness around softirqs.
>> I'm not familiar with net drivers, but I'll see if I can figure
>> anything out there.
>
>Oh this code looks ugly :(
>
>Do you have CONFIG_SMP=y or not ?

Yeah CONFIG_SMP=y (and CONFIG_PREEMPT=y too, fwiw).

I did try forcing it into the no-op locking (as though config SMP
wasn't set), it didn't help (and it doesn't look like that would be
safe with CONFIG_PREEMPT=y either).

The bit in smc_hardware_send_pkt looks like skipping softirq
invocation when there's already one running wouldn't give the same
behaviour as before:

	if (!smc_special_trylock(&lp->lock, flags)) {
		netif_stop_queue(dev);
		tasklet_schedule(&lp->tx_task);
		return;
	}

... that said, I've no idea if that matters.

Of course I also don't know if the network driver is even to blame :-(

Cheers,
-Brian