linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] tty: serial: owl: Add support for kernel debugger

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: <20210107181604.GA427955@BV030612LT>
Date:   Thu, 7 Jan 2021 20:16:04 +0200
From:   Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea@...il.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>,
        Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
        linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-actions@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] tty: serial: owl: Add support for kernel debugger

Hi Greg,

Thank you for the review!

On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 04:20:55PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 07:02:02PM +0200, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote:
> > Implement 'poll_put_char' and 'poll_get_char' callbacks in struct
> > 'owl_uart_ops' that enables OWL UART to be used for kernel debugging
> > over serial line.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea@...il.com>

[...]

> > +
> > +static void owl_uart_poll_put_char(struct uart_port *port, unsigned char ch)
> > +{
> > +	while (owl_uart_read(port, OWL_UART_STAT) & OWL_UART_STAT_TFFU)
> > +		cpu_relax();
> 
> Unbounded loops?  What could possibly go wrong?
> 
> :(
> 
> Please don't do that in the kernel, put a max bound on this.

I didn't realize the issue since I had encountered this pattern in many
other serial drivers, as well: altera_uart, arc_uart, atmel_serial, etc.

> And are you _SURE_ that cpu_relax() is what you want to call here?

I'm thinking of replacing the loop with 'readl_poll_timeout_atomic()',
if that would be a better approach.

Kind regards,
Cristi

> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h