linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] lib/ubsan: Don't seralize UBSAN report

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 7 Oct 2019 18:14:57 +0200
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To:     Julien Grall <julien.grall@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, aryabinin@...tuozzo.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
        Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] lib/ubsan: Don't seralize UBSAN report

On 2019-09-20 11:08:35 [+0100], Julien Grall wrote:
> At the moment, UBSAN report will be serialized using a spin_lock(). On
> RT-systems, spinlocks are turned to rt_spin_lock and may sleep. This will
> result to the following splat if the undefined behavior is in a context
> that can sleep:
…
> So the lock usefulness seems pretty limited. Rather than trying to
> accomodate RT-system by switching to a raw_spin_lock(), the lock is now
> completely dropped.
> 
> Reported-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@....com>

I just applied this to my RT tree. Is someone here feeling responsible
to apply this upstream?

Sebastian