linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] softirq: Remove the unnecessary CONFIG_TRACE

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 10 Aug 2021 15:59:10 +0200
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Yejune Deng <yejune.deng@...il.com>
Cc:     peterz@...radead.org, frederic@...nel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
        dave@...olabs.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Yejune Deng <yejunedeng@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] softirq: Remove the unnecessary CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS

On Wed, Jun 02 2021 at 10:53, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 03:34:42PM +0800, Yejune Deng wrote:
>> The local_irq_enable() and local_irq_disable() had two definitions that
>> include CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS or not.
>
> Hm, this has a behavioral change. Current code only does tracing and
> raw_local_irq_disable/enable when CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS. This change
> causes it to always do raw_local_irq_disable/enable. Which is the right
> behavior?

Disabling interrupts is only required when CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS=y. So
the code is correct as is.

Thanks,

        tglx