linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] s390/vfio-ap: control access to PQAP(AQIC) interception handler

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: <20210525150054.GA1002214@nvidia.com>
Date:   Tue, 25 May 2021 12:00:54 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To:     Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        borntraeger@...ibm.com, cohuck@...hat.com,
        pasic@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, jjherne@...ux.ibm.com,
        alex.williamson@...hat.com, kwankhede@...dia.com,
        frankja@...ux.ibm.com, david@...hat.com, imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com,
        hca@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] s390/vfio-ap: control access to PQAP(AQIC)
 interception handler

On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 10:59:25AM -0400, Tony Krowiak wrote:
> > But this is alot of complicated and unused code to solve a lock
> > ordering problem..
> 
> If you have a better solution, I'm all ears. I've been down this
> road a couple of times now and solving lock ordering for
> multiple asynchronous processes is not trivial. This seems like
> a reasonable solution and provides for flexibility for including
> additional hooks to handle interception of other AP instructions.

Lock ordering is very trivial. In this case you have to always hold
the hook lock before obtaining the matrix_dev lock. From what I
remember there was only one error on the set path where they were
ordered wrong

Jason