linux-kernel - Re: [GIT pull] locking/urgent for v5.10-rc6

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]

Message-ID: <20201202075427.GA5838@osiris>
Date:   Wed, 2 Dec 2020 08:54:27 +0100
From:   Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT pull] locking/urgent for v5.10-rc6

> > But but but...
> > 
> >   do_idle()			# IRQs on
> >     local_irq_disable();	# IRQs off
> >     defaul_idle_call()	# IRQs off
> 	lockdep_hardirqs_on();	# IRQs off, but lockdep things they're on
> >       arch_cpu_idle()		# IRQs off
> >         enabled_wait()	# IRQs off
> > 	  raw_local_save()	# still off
> > 	  psw_idle()		# very much off
> > 	    ext_int_handler	# get an interrupt ?!?!
> 	      rcu_irq_enter()	# lockdep thinks IRQs are on <- FAIL
> 
> I can't much read s390 assembler, but ext_int_handler() has a
> TRACE_IRQS_OFF, which would be sufficient to re-align the lockdep state
> with the actual state, but there's some condition before it, what's that
> test and is that right?

After digging a bit into our asm code: no, it is not right, and only
for psw_idle() it is wrong.

What happens with the current code:

- default_idle_call() calls lockdep_hardirqs_on() before calling into
  arch_cpu_idle()

- our arch_cpu_idle() calls psw_idle() which enables irqs. the irq
  handler will call/use the SWITCH_ASYNC macro which clears the
  interrupt enabled bits in the old program status word (_only_ for
  psw_idle)

- this again causes the interrupt handler to _not_ call TRACE_IRQS_OFF
  and therefore lockdep thinks interrupts are enabled within the
  interrupt handler

So I guess my patch which I sent yesterday evening should fix all that
mess - plus an explicit trace_hardirqs_off() call in our udelay
implementation is required now.

I'll send a proper patch later.