linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] i2c: virtio: disable timeout handling

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: <d16fed64-6aa9-8c68-91e0-06fc84c3049c@intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 20 Oct 2021 11:36:30 +0800
From:   Jie Deng <jie.deng@...el.com>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@...s.com>,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc:     wsa@...nel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel@...s.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] i2c: virtio: disable timeout handling


On 2021/10/19 16:09, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Doing this may not be a good thing based on the kernel rules I have
> understood until now. Maybe Greg and Wolfram can clarify on this.
>
> We are waiting here for an external entity (Host kernel) or a firmware
> that uses virtio for transport. If the other side is hacked, it can
> make the kernel hang here for ever. I thought that is something that
> the kernel should never do.


I'm also worried about this. We may be able to solve it by setting a big

timeout value in the driver.