linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH printk v1 10/10] serial: 8250: implement write

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: <87k0l0wb41.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de>
Date:   Thu, 05 Aug 2021 10:32:38 +0206
From:   John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
To:     Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au>,
        Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
        kuldip dwivedi <kuldip.dwivedi@...esoftware.com>,
        Wang Qing <wangqing@...o.com>, Andrij Abyzov <aabyzov@....com>,
        Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
        Eddie Huang <eddie.huang@...iatek.com>,
        Claire Chang <tientzu@...omium.org>,
        Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@...omium.org>,
        Zhang Qilong <zhangqilong3@...wei.com>,
        "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...am.me.uk>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru>,
        "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
        Al Cooper <alcooperx@...il.com>, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH printk v1 10/10] serial: 8250: implement write_atomic

On 2021-08-05, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org> wrote:
> On 03. 08. 21, 16:07, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 03:19:01PM +0206, John Ogness wrote:
>>> Implement an NMI-safe write_atomic() console function in order to
>>> support synchronous console printing.
>>>
>>> Since interrupts need to be disabled during transmit, all usage of
>>> the IER register is wrapped with access functions that use the
>>> printk cpulock to synchronize register access while tracking the
>>> state of the interrupts. This is necessary because write_atomic()
>>> can be called from an NMI context that has preempted write_atomic().
>> 
>> ...
>> 
>>> +static inline void serial8250_set_IER(struct uart_8250_port *up,
>>> +				      unsigned char ier)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct uart_port *port = &up->port;
>>> +	unsigned long flags;
>>> +	bool is_console;
>> 
>>> +	is_console = uart_console(port);
>>> +
>>> +	if (is_console)
>>> +		console_atomic_cpu_lock(flags);
>>> +
>>> +	serial_out(up, UART_IER, ier);
>>> +
>>> +	if (is_console)
>>> +		console_atomic_cpu_unlock(flags);
>> 
>> I would rewrite it as
>> 
>> 	if (uart_console()) {
>> 		console_atomic_cpu_lock(flags);
>> 		serial_out(up, UART_IER, ier);
>> 		console_atomic_cpu_unlock(flags);
>> 	} else {
>> 		serial_out(up, UART_IER, ier);
>> 	}

Some locations have more than just 1 line of code in between
lock/unlock. I agree this looks better, but am unsure how much
copy/paste code is acceptable.

>> No additional variable, easier to get the algorithm on the first
>> glance, less error prone.
>
> Yes, the original is terrible.
>
> Another option:
>
> bool locked = console_atomic_cpu_lock(flags, uart_console());
> serial_out(up, UART_IER, ier);
> console_atomic_cpu_unlock(flags, locked);
>
> Which makes console_atomic_cpu_lock to lock only if second parameter
> is true and return its value too.

I am not sure how common such semantics for lock/unlock functions
are. But since this pattern, using uart_console(), will most likely be a
common pattern for atomic consoles, I can see how this will be useful.

I will choose one of these 2 suggestions for v2. Thanks.

> BTW I actually don't know what console_atomic_cpu_lock does to think 
> about it more as I was not CCed, and neither lore sees the other patches:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mips/20210803131301.5588-1-john.ogness@linutronix.de/

Only the lkml mailing list saw the full series:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210803131301.5588-1-john.ogness@linutronix.de/

John Ogness