linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv3 2/3] arm64: entry: refactor EL1 interrupt entry logic

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: <YVZyDIRnIMaxQjg9@piliu.users.ipa.redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 1 Oct 2021 10:27:24 +0800
From:   Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@...il.com>
To:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@....com>,
        Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
        Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Yuichi Ito <ito-yuichi@...itsu.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 2/3] arm64: entry: refactor EL1 interrupt entry logic

On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 03:00:59PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 09:17:07PM +0800, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> > From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> > 
> > Currently we distinguish IRQ and definitely-PNMI at entry/exit time
> > via the enter_el1_irq_or_nmi() and enter_el1_irq_or_nmi() helpers. In
> > subsequent patches we'll need to handle the two cases more distinctly
> > in the body of the exception handler.
> > 
> > To make this possible, this patch refactors el1_interrupt to be a
> > top-level dispatcher to separate handlers for the IRQ and PNMI cases,
> > removing the need for the enter_el1_irq_or_nmi() and
> > exit_el1_irq_or_nmi() helpers.
> > 
> > Note that since arm64_enter_nmi() calls __nmi_enter(), which
> > increments the preemt_count, we could never preempt when handling a
> > PNMI. We now only check for preemption in the IRQ case, which makes
> > this clearer.
> > 
> > There should be no functional change as a result of this patch.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> > Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
> > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
> > Cc: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
> > Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
> > Cc: Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@....com>
> > Cc: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
> > Cc: Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@....com>
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> > Cc: Yuichi Ito <ito-yuichi@...itsu.com>
> > Cc: Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@...il.com>
> > Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> > To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
> 
> As a heads-up, you need to add your Signed-off-by tag when you post
> patches from other people, even if you make no changes. See:
> 
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v5.14/process/submitting-patches.html#sign-your-work-the-developer-s-certificate-of-origin
> 
Oh, thanks and I realize it is a serious license issue. 

> Other than that, this looks fine to me.
> 
Thank you very much.


Regards,

	Pingfan