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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 18:01:04 -0400 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, f.hetzelt@...berlin.de, david.kaplan@....com, konrad.wilk@...cle.com, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] virtio-pci: harden INTX interrupts On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 11:36:24PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > >From the interrupt perspective the sequence: > > disable_irq(); > vp_dev->intx_soft_enabled = true; > enable_irq(); > > is perfectly fine as well. Any interrupt arriving during the disabled > section will be reraised on enable_irq() in hardware because it's a > level interrupt. Any resulting failure is either a hardware or a > hypervisor bug. yes but it's a shared interrupt. what happens if multiple callers do this in parallel?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists