linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched/isolation: isolate from handling managed interrupt

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:   Thu, 16 Jan 2020 13:08:17 +0100
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/isolation: isolate from handling managed interrupt

Ming,

Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com> writes:

> @@ -212,12 +213,29 @@ int irq_do_set_affinity(struct irq_data *data, const struct cpumask *mask,
>  {
>  	struct irq_desc *desc = irq_data_to_desc(data);
>  	struct irq_chip *chip = irq_data_get_irq_chip(data);
> +	const struct cpumask *housekeeping_mask =
> +		housekeeping_cpumask(HK_FLAG_MANAGED_IRQ);
>  	int ret;
> +	cpumask_var_t tmp_mask = (struct cpumask *)mask;
>  
>  	if (!chip || !chip->irq_set_affinity)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
> -	ret = chip->irq_set_affinity(data, mask, force);
> +	zalloc_cpumask_var(&tmp_mask, GFP_ATOMIC);

I clearly told you:

    "That's wrong. This code is called with interrupts disabled, so
     GFP_KERNEL is wrong. And NO, we won't do a GFP_ATOMIC allocation
     here."

Is that last sentence unclear in any way?

Thanks,

        tglx