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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2024 12:02:23 -0500
From: Anthony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, jjherne@...ux.ibm.com, alex.williamson@...hat.com,
        borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com, kwankhede@...dia.com, frankja@...ux.ibm.com,
        imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com, david@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390/vfio-ap: handle response code 01 on queue reset


On 12/4/23 5:05 PM, Halil Pasic wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 12:51:49 -0500
> Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>>> s/if\/when/at latest before/
>>>
>>> I would argue that some of the cleanups need to happen before even 01 is
>>> reflected...
>> To what cleanups are you referring?
> Event notification and interruption disablement for starters. Otherwise
> OS has no way to figure out when is GISA and NIB safe to deallocate.
> Those actions are part of the reset process. I.e. some of the reset stuff
> can be deferred at most until the queue is made accessible again, some
> not so much.


How do you propose we disable interrupts if the PQAP(AQIC) will likely 
fail with response code 01 which is the subject of this patch? Do you 
think we should not free up the AQIC resources as we do in this patch?


>   
>
> Regards,
> Halil

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ