linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] IRQ handlers run with some high-priority interrupts(not NMI) enabled on some platform

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:   Sat, 13 Feb 2021 00:05:43 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
To:     "Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)" <song.bao.hua@...ilicon.com>
Cc:     "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
        "geert@...ux-m68k.org" <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        "funaho@...ai.org" <funaho@...ai.org>,
        "philb@....org" <philb@....org>, "corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org" <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>,
        "fthain@...egraphics.com.au" <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] IRQ handlers run with some high-priority interrupts(not
 NMI) enabled on some platform

On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 12:00 AM Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)
<song.bao.hua@...ilicon.com> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd@...nel.org]
> > Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2021 11:34 AM
> > To: Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) <song.bao.hua@...ilicon.com>
> > Cc: tglx@...utronix.de; gregkh@...uxfoundation.org; arnd@...db.de;
> > geert@...ux-m68k.org; funaho@...ai.org; philb@....org; corbet@....net;
> > mingo@...hat.com; linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org;
> > fthain@...egraphics.com.au; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> > Subject: Re: [RFC] IRQ handlers run with some high-priority interrupts(not NMI)
> > enabled on some platform
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 2:18 AM Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)
> > <song.bao.hua@...ilicon.com> wrote:
> >
> > > So I am requesting comments on:
> > > 1. are we expecting all interrupts except NMI to be disabled in irq handler,
> > > or do we actually allow some high-priority interrupts between low and NMI
> > to
> > > come in some platforms?
> >
> > I tried to come to an answer but this does not seem particularly well-defined.
> > There are a few things I noticed:
> >
> > - going through the local_irq_save()/restore() implementations on all
> >   architectures, I did not find any other ones besides m68k that leave
> >   high-priority interrupts enabled. I did see that at least alpha and openrisc
> >   are designed to support that in hardware, but the code just leaves the
> >   interrupts disabled.
>
> The case is a little different. Explicit local_irq_save() does disable all
> high priority interrupts on m68k. The only difference is arch_irqs_disabled()
> of m68k will return true while low-priority interrupts are masked and high
> -priority are still open. M68k's hardIRQ also runs in this context with high
> priority interrupts enabled.

My point was that on most other architectures, local_irq_save()/restore()
always disables/enables all interrupts, while on m68k it restores the
specific level they were on before. On alpha, it does the same as on m68k,
but then the top-level interrupt handler just disables them all before calling
into any other code.

It's possible that I missed some other implementation doing the same
as m68k, as this code is fairly subtle on some architectures.

        Arnd