| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <587F80A7.10008@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 14:50:15 +0000
From: James Morse <james.morse@....com>
To: Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@...eaurora.org>
CC: christoffer.dall@...aro.org, marc.zyngier@....com,
pbonzini@...hat.com, rkrcmar@...hat.com, linux@...linux.org.uk,
catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com, rjw@...ysocki.net,
lenb@...nel.org, matt@...eblueprint.co.uk, robert.moore@...el.com,
lv.zheng@...el.com, nkaje@...eaurora.org, zjzhang@...eaurora.org,
mark.rutland@....com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
eun.taik.lee@...sung.com, sandeepa.s.prabhu@...il.com,
labbott@...hat.com, shijie.huang@....com, rruigrok@...eaurora.org,
paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, tn@...ihalf.com, fu.wei@...aro.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, bristot@...hat.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
devel@...ica.org, Suzuki.Poulose@....com, punit.agrawal@....com,
astone@...hat.com, harba@...eaurora.org, hanjun.guo@...aro.org,
john.garry@...wei.com, shiju.jose@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 05/10] acpi: apei: handle SEA notification type for
ARMv8
Hi Tyler,
On 12/01/17 18:15, Tyler Baicar wrote:
> ARM APEI extension proposal added SEA (Synchrounous External
Nit: Synchronous
> Abort) notification type for ARMv8.
> Add a new GHES error source handling function for SEA. If an error
> source's notification type is SEA, then this function can be registered
> into the SEA exception handler. That way GHES will parse and report
> SEA exceptions when they occur.
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
> index 2acbc60..87efe26 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
> @@ -767,6 +772,62 @@ static struct notifier_block ghes_notifier_sci = {
> .notifier_call = ghes_notify_sci,
> };
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_ACPI_APEI_SEA
> +static LIST_HEAD(ghes_sea);
> +
> +static int ghes_notify_sea(struct notifier_block *this,
> + unsigned long event, void *data)
> +{
> + struct ghes *ghes;
> + int ret = NOTIFY_DONE;
> +
> + nmi_enter();
Can we move this into the arch code? Its because we got here from a
synchronous-exception that makes this nmi-like, I think it only makes sense for
it be called from under /arch/.
Where did the rcu_read_lock() go? I can see its missing from ghes_notify_nmi()
too, but I don't know enough about RCU to know if that's safe!
The second paragraph in the comment above rcu_read_lock() describes it as
preventing call_rcu() during a read-side critical section that was running
concurrently. Doesn't this mean we can race with ghes_sea_remove() on another
CPU because we wait for the wrong grace period?
The same comment talks about how these read-side critical sections can nest, so
I think its quite safe to make these 'lock' calls here.
> + list_for_each_entry_rcu(ghes, &ghes_sea, list) {
> + if (!ghes_proc(ghes))
> + ret = NOTIFY_OK;
> + }
> + nmi_exit();
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static struct notifier_block ghes_notifier_sea = {
> + .notifier_call = ghes_notify_sea,
> +};
> +
> +static int ghes_sea_add(struct ghes *ghes)
> +{
> + mutex_lock(&ghes_list_mutex);
> + if (list_empty(&ghes_sea))
> + register_sea_notifier(&ghes_notifier_sea);
> + list_add_rcu(&ghes->list, &ghes_sea);
> + mutex_unlock(&ghes_list_mutex);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void ghes_sea_remove(struct ghes *ghes)
> +{
> + mutex_lock(&ghes_list_mutex);
> + list_del_rcu(&ghes->list);
> + if (list_empty(&ghes_sea))
> + unregister_sea_notifier(&ghes_notifier_sea);
> + mutex_unlock(&ghes_list_mutex);
ghes_nmi_remove() has:
> /*
> * To synchronize with NMI handler, ghes can only be
> * freed after NMI handler finishes.
> */
> synchronize_rcu()
This 'waits until a grace period has elapsed'. This is because ghes_remove()
goes and kfree()s the ghes object while another CPU may be holding that entry in
the list in ghes_notify_sea().
> +}
> +#else /* CONFIG_HAVE_ACPI_APEI_SEA */
> +static inline int ghes_sea_add(struct ghes *ghes)
> +{
> + pr_err(GHES_PFX "ID: %d, trying to add SEA notification which is not supported\n",
> + ghes->generic->header.source_id);
> + return -ENOTSUPP;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void ghes_sea_remove(struct ghes *ghes)
> +{
> + pr_err(GHES_PFX "ID: %d, trying to remove SEA notification which is not supported\n",
> + ghes->generic->header.source_id);
> +}
> +#endif /* CONFIG_HAVE_ACPI_APEI_SEA */
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_ACPI_APEI_NMI
> /*
> * printk is not safe in NMI context. So in NMI handler, we allocate
> @@ -1011,6 +1072,14 @@ static int ghes_probe(struct platform_device *ghes_dev)
> case ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_EXTERNAL:
> case ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_SCI:
> break;
> + case ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_SEA:
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HAVE_ACPI_APEI_SEA)) {
> + pr_warn(GHES_PFX "Generic hardware error source: %d notified via SEA is not supported\n",
> + generic->header.source_id);
> + rc = -ENOTSUPP;
> + goto err;
> + }
> + break;
> case ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_NMI:
> if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HAVE_ACPI_APEI_NMI)) {
> pr_warn(GHES_PFX "Generic hardware error source: %d notified via NMI interrupt is not supported!\n",
> @@ -1022,6 +1091,13 @@ static int ghes_probe(struct platform_device *ghes_dev)
> pr_warning(GHES_PFX "Generic hardware error source: %d notified via local interrupt is not supported!\n",
> generic->header.source_id);
> goto err;
> + case ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_GPIO:
> + case ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_SEI:
> + case ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_GSIV:
These three weren't mentioned in the commit message. I guess they are drive-by
cleanup?
> + pr_warn(GHES_PFX "Generic hardware error source: %d notified via notification type %u is not supported\n",
> + generic->header.source_id, generic->header.source_id);
> + rc = -ENOTSUPP;
> + goto err;
> default:
> pr_warning(FW_WARN GHES_PFX "Unknown notification type: %u for generic hardware error source: %d\n",
> generic->notify.type, generic->header.source_id);
Thanks,
James
Powered by blists - more mailing lists