linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/610] 6.1.28-rc2 review

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: <20230509-robust-crate-5fe128d00e6d@spud>
Date:   Tue, 9 May 2023 21:41:42 +0100
From:   Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shuah@...nel.org, patches@...nelci.org,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, pavel@...x.de, jonathanh@...dia.com,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com,
        srw@...dewatkins.net, rwarsow@....de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.1 000/610] 6.1.28-rc2 review

On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 12:57:58PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 05:26:31AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.1.28 release.
> > There are 610 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> > to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> > let me know.
> > 
> > Responses should be made by Thu, 11 May 2023 03:05:05 +0000.
> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> > 
> 
> Build results:
> 	total: 155 pass: 155 fail: 0
> Qemu test results:
> 	total: 519 pass: 519 fail: 0
> 
> New persistent runtime warning when booting riscv32/64 images:

You sure this is new? I seem to be able to reproduce for QEMU (which I
don't usually test) in several versions of 6.1. Don't see it in (my)
hardware though, as the particular platform doesn't end up calling the
offending function. Out of curiosity, what's your QEMU invocation?

Anyways, looks like a partial backport is the cause. How's it look with:

diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
index 694267d1fe81..fd1238df6149 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
 #include <linux/bitmap.h>
 #include <linux/ctype.h>
 #include <linux/libfdt.h>
+#include <linux/memory.h>
 #include <linux/module.h>
 #include <linux/of.h>
 #include <asm/alternative.h>
@@ -316,8 +317,11 @@ void __init_or_module riscv_cpufeature_patch_func(struct alt_entry *begin,
 		}
 
 		tmp = (1U << alt->errata_id);
-		if (cpu_req_feature & tmp)
+		if (cpu_req_feature & tmp) {
+			mutex_lock(&text_mutex);
 			patch_text_nosync(alt->old_ptr, alt->alt_ptr, alt->alt_len);
+			mutex_unlock(&text_mutex);
+		}
 	}
 }
 #endif


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)