[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180808123408.GC24736@iMac.local>
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2018 13:34:09 +0100
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Trap WFI executed in userspace
On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 11:24:34AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 07/08/18 11:05, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 10:33:26AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >> It recently came to light that userspace can execute WFI, and that
> >> the arm64 kernel doesn trap this event. This sounds rather benign,
Nitpick: "doesn't".
> >> but the kernel should decide when it wants to wait for an interrupt,
> >> and not userspace.
> >>
> >> Let's trap WFI and treat it as a way to yield the CPU to another
> >> process.
[...]
> > I can't think of a legitimate reason for userspace to execute WFI
> > however. Userspace doesn't have interrupts under Linux, so it makes
> > no sense to wait for one.
> >
> > Have we seen anybody using WFI in userspace? It may be cleaner to
> > map this to SIGILL rather than be permissive and regret it later.
>
> I couldn't find any user, and I'm happy to just send userspace to hell
> in that case. But it could also been said that since it was never
> prevented, it is a de-facto ABI.
I wouldn't really go as far as SIGILL on WFI. I think the patch is fine
as it is. In case Will plans to merge it:
Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists