linux-kernel - Re: Kernel 5.3.x, 5.2.2+: VMware player suspend on 64/32 bit guests

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:   Mon, 12 Aug 2019 19:24:34 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Woody Suwalski <terraluna977@...il.com>
cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Kernel 5.3.x, 5.2.2+: VMware player suspend on 64/32 bit
 guests

 A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
 Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
 A: Top-posting.
 Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

 A: No.
 Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?

 http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top

Woody,

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019, Woody Suwalski wrote:

> I have added a timeout counter in __synchronize_hardirq().
> At the bottom I have converted while(inprogress); to while(inprogress
> && timeout++ < 100);
> 
> That is bypassing the suspend lockup problem. On both 32-bit and
> 64-bit VMs the countdown is triggered by sync of irq9.

So ACPI triggered an interrupt, which got already forwarded to a CPU, but
it is not handled. That's more than strange. 

> Which probably means that there is some issue in ACPI handler and
> synchronize_hardirq() is stuck on it?

The ACPI handler is not the culprit. This is either an emulation bug or
something really strange. Can you please use a WARN_ON() if the loop is
exited via the timeout so we can see in which context this happens?

Thanks,

	tglx