linux-kernel - Re: spin_lock behavior with ARM64 big.Little/HMP

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <e2566794-5818-c42e-ec1b-aa8ac7bc196f@arm.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 Mar 2017 11:23:54 +0100
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel-owner@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: spin_lock behavior with ARM64 big.Little/HMP



On 30/03/17 05:12, Vikram Mulukutla wrote:
> 
> Hi Sudeep,
> 
>>
>> Interesting. Just curious if this is r0p0/p1 A53 ? If so, is the errata
>> 819472 enabled ?
> 
> Sorry for bringing this up after the loo-ong delay, but I've been
> assured that the A53 involved is > r0p1. I've also confirmed this
> problem on multiple internal platforms, and I'm pretty sure that it
> occurs on any b.L out there today. Also, we found the same problematic
> lock design used in the workqueue code in the kernel, causing the same
> livelock. It's very very rare and requires a perfect set of circumstances.
> 
> If it would help I can provide a unit test if you folks would be
> generous enough to test it on the latest Juno or something b.L that's
> also upstream.
> 

Sure, please do share the unit test. I will give that a try on Juno.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep