linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tty: serial: samsung_tty: remove spinlock flags in interrupt handlers

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: <7f348e4c-3051-13cf-d461-eeda0ef53fdd@canonical.com>
Date:   Tue, 16 Mar 2021 10:47:53 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
To:     Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, marcan@...can.st, arnd@...nel.org,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tty: serial: samsung_tty: remove spinlock flags in
 interrupt handlers

On 16/03/2021 10:02, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 07:12:12PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Since interrupt handler is called with disabled local interrupts, there
>> is no need to use the spinlock primitives disabling interrupts as well.
> 
> This isn't generally true due to "threadirqs" and that can lead to
> deadlocks if the console code is called from hard irq context.
> 
> Now, this is *not* the case for this particular driver since it doesn't
> even bother to take the port lock in console_write(). That should
> probably be fixed instead.
> 
> See https://lore.kernel.org/r/X7kviiRwuxvPxC8O@localhost.

Thanks for the link, quite interesting! For one type of device we have
two interrupts (RX and TX) so I guess it's a valid point/risk. However
let me try to understand it more.

Assuming we had only one interrupt line, how this interrupt handler with
threadirqs could be called from hardirq context?

You wrote there:
> For console drivers this can even happen for the same interrupt as the
> generic interrupt code can call printk(), and so can any other handler
> that isn't threaded (e.g. hrtimers or explicit IRQF_NO_THREAD).

However I replaced here only interrupt handler's spin lock to non-irq.
This code path will be executed only when interrupt is masked therefore
for one interrupt line there is *no possibility of*:

-> s3c64xx_serial_handle_irq
   - interrupts are masked
   - s3c24xx_serial_tx_irq
     - spin_lock()
                       -> hrtimers or other IRQF_NO_THREAD
                          - console_write() or something
                            - s3c64xx_serial_handle_irq
                              - s3c24xx_serial_tx_irq
                                - spin_lock()


Best regards,
Krzysztof