linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/nmi: remove the irqwork from long duration nmi handler

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 10 Jan 2020 17:34:50 +0000
From:   Changbin Du <changbin.du@...il.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/nmi: remove the irqwork from long duration nmi
 handler

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 04:13:29PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 10:05:49PM +0800, Changbin Du wrote:
> > I added a new function nmi_check_duration(), so shoudn't this check be
> > done in that function?
> 
> Why should it be done in that function? Your patch is removing irq_work
> - why is it doing additional changes?
> 
Just to move all the check code together and be a standalone function.
yes, this somewhat does code refining after the irqwork is removed but
I think it is normal.

> > Don't worry about performance, this function will be inlined by
> > compiler.
> 
> I'm not worried about that at all.
> 
> Btw, why are you sending private mail and not keeping the discussion on
> the mailing list?
> 
oops, typed wrong key. Just added back.

> -- 
> Regards/Gruss,
>     Boris.
> 
> https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette

-- 
Cheers,
Changbin Du