linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] genirq: Provide basic NMI management for interrupt lines

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <671cb2a4-9ffb-ceef-a078-3162387962a5@arm.com>
Date:   Tue, 17 Jul 2018 13:25:25 +0100
From:   Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@....com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com, marc.zyngier@....com,
        mingo@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] genirq: Provide basic NMI management for
 interrupt lines



On 17/07/18 12:28, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 12:13:44PM +0100, Julien Thierry wrote:
> 
>> I'm a bit unsure about this one. In practice NMI handlers shouldn't take
>> forever nor block the system for too long.
> 
> On x86 at least, kgdb can be in NMI context for extended periods. Not
> saying that's a good thing, but on occasion we get reports on stuff
> coming apart because of that.
> 
> (most times we tell people to not do that then)
> 

Thanks for the explanation. I'll remove the function to avoid issues 
related to those scenario to arise.

Thanks,

-- 
Julien Thierry