linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] random: spread out jitter callback to different CPUs

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]

Date:   Fri, 7 Oct 2022 09:32:40 -0600
From:   "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc:     tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
        Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>,
        Sultan Alsawaf <sultan@...neltoast.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] random: spread out jitter callback to different CPUs

On Fri, Oct 7, 2022 at 8:55 AM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
<bigeasy@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
> On 2022-10-07 08:01:20 [-0600], Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > Here's a reproducer of this flow, which prints out:
> >
> >     [    4.157610] wireguard: Stack on cpu 1 is corrupt
>
> I understood Sultan's description. The end of story (after discussing
> this tglx) is that this will be documented since it can't be fixed for
> add_timer_on().

Right, that's about where I wound up too, which is why I just
abandoned the approach of this patchset. Calling del_timer_sync()
before each new add_timer_on() (but after !timer_pending()) seems
kinda ugly.

Jason