linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] clk: tegra: Use readl_relaxed_poll_timeout_atomic in tegra210_clock

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: <20171020001859.GA9196@Asurada-Nvidia>
Date:   Thu, 19 Oct 2017 17:19:01 -0700
From:   Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
To:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc:     sboyd@...eaurora.org, pdeschrijver@...dia.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, jonathanh@...dia.com,
        mturquette@...libre.com, pgaikwad@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] clk: tegra: Use readl_relaxed_poll_timeout_atomic in
 tegra210_clock_init

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 11:42:24AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 11:44:22AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > > Below is the call trace of tegra210_init_pllu() function:
> > > >   start_kernel()
> > > >   -> time_init()
> > > >   --> of_clk_init()
> > > >   ---> tegra210_clock_init()
> > > >   ----> tegra210_pll_init()
> > > >   -----> tegra210_init_pllu()
> 
> > I'm wondering why we're not seeing a splat for this. Usually the kernel
> > will warn if you sleep during atomic context. Does this mean we're just
> > not hitting that case?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > readx_poll_timeout() has a might_sleep_if(), and
> > therefore it should always cause the splat.
> 
> That's true as long as CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP is enabled locally.
> 
> > Any ideas why this has gone unnoticed for all this time?
> 
> We can see in the tegra210_init_pllu() function that it'll not call
> tegra210_enable_pllu() if pllu is already enabled (by bootloader).
> 
> You can verify it by adding an irqs_disabled() in this routine. The
> function is called during system-boot and suspend-n-resume. And both

A correction: using mainline kernel, only system-boot as the commit log
describes.

> cases should be irqs_disabled().
> 
> Thanks
> Nicolin