linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/irq: Use printk_deferred() on raw_spin

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, 24 Sep 2020 12:28:22 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>
Cc:     x86@...nel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/irq: Use printk_deferred() on raw_spin_lock()
 protected sections

On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 06:22:12PM +0200, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote:
> While testing hotplug I got this BUG:

> 
> It was caused by printk() inside a code section protected by a
> raw_spin_lock() that ended up calling a serial console that
> uses a regular spin_lock().
> 
> Use the printk_deferred() to avoid calling the serial console
> in a raw_spin_lock() protected section.

I consider printk_deferred() to be a bug, can't we just wait for the new
printk implementation to land so we don't need all this nonsense?