linux-kernel - Re: WARN_ON: userstacktrace on irq events

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: <20190405093209.7a5c5133@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Fri, 5 Apr 2019 09:32:09 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...il.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: WARN_ON: userstacktrace on irq events

On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 10:12:27 +0200 (CEST)
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:

> > BOOM! Warn on.
> > 
> > Can we make that access_ok() call in the copy_stack_frame not trigger
> > the warning just if we are in an interrupt?  
> 
> You really want to have access_ok_atomic() or such which does not have the
> WARN and use that in copy_stack_frame(). That's fine here because the
> actual copy is inside a pagefault disabled region.

I was thinking the same.

Masami, did you post patches to do something like this?
"access_ok_inatomic()" or something?

-- Steve