linux-kernel - Re: "irq/matrix: Spread interrupts on allocation" breaks nouveau in mainline kernel

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]

Date:   Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:25:43 -0500
From:   Lyude Paul <lyude@...hat.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     "Ghannam, Yazen" <Yazen.Ghannam@....com>,
        "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "keith.busch@...el.com" <keith.busch@...el.com>,
        "mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: "irq/matrix: Spread interrupts on allocation" breaks nouveau in
 mainline kernel

On Thu, 2018-01-25 at 19:46 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2018, Lyude Paul wrote:
> 
> > I think you are right, apologies. Glad to know this isn't a regression in
> > the
> > IRQ handling code :). It looks like our nouveau problems are probably coming
> > from the fact that we don't just leave IRQs setup through suspend/resume
> > which
> > as far as I can tell, is probably not the correct thing to do.
> 
> If you tear down the interrupt, then you have to make sure that it's
> completely masked and disabled on the device side (including MSI).
Does this only need to be done if we handle irq_request()/irq_free() ourselves,
or can we skip some of these steps if we let the kernel handle
disabling/enabling IRQs during s/r?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	tglx