linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH printk v2 2/5] printk: Add NMI safety to console_flush_on_panic() and console

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, 14 Jul 2023 13:00:49 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc:     John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH printk v2 2/5] printk: Add NMI safety to
 console_flush_on_panic() and console_unblank()

On (23/07/13 16:43), Petr Mladek wrote:
> 
> Simple removal of console_trylock() in console_flush_on_panic() would
> cause that other CPUs might still be able to take it and race.
> The problem is avoided by checking panic_in_progress() in console_lock()
> and console_trylock(). They will never succeed on non-panic CPUs.
> 

In theory, we also can have non-panic CPU in console_flush_all(),
which should let panic CPU to take over the next time it checks
abandon_console_lock_in_panic() (other_cpu_in_panic() after 5/5),
but it may not happen immediately. I wonder if we somehow can/want
to "wait" in console_flush_on_panic() for non-panic CPU handover?