linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3-its: Don't try to move a disabled irq

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:   Wed, 3 Jun 2020 22:14:50 +0000
From:   "Herrenschmidt, Benjamin" <benh@...zon.com>
To:     "maz@...nel.org" <maz@...nel.org>,
        "Saidi, Ali" <alisaidi@...zon.com>
CC:     "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "jason@...edaemon.net" <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "Woodhouse, David" <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
        "Zilberman, Zeev" <zeev@...zon.com>,
        "Machulsky, Zorik" <zorik@...zon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3-its: Don't try to move a disabled irq

On Wed, 2020-06-03 at 16:16 +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > My original patch should certain check activated and not disabled.
> > With that do you still have reservations Marc?
> 
> I'd still prefer it if we could do something in core code, rather
> than spreading these checks in the individual drivers. If we can't,
> fair enough. But it feels like the core set_affinity function could
> just do the same thing in a single place (although the started vs
> activated is yet another piece of the puzzle I didn't consider,
> and the ITS doesn't need the "can_reserve" thing).

For the sake of fixing the problem in a timely and backportable way I
would suggest first merging the fix, *then* fixing the core core.

Cheers,
Ben.