linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] firmware: qcom_scm: Mark get_wq

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: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 09:39:13 +0200
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To: quic_uchalich@...cinc.com, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
 Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 kernel@...cinc.com, Murali Nalajala <quic_mnalajal@...cinc.com>,
 stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: qcom_scm: Mark get_wq_ctx() as atomic call



On 6/11/24 20:27, Unnathi Chalicheemala via B4 Relay wrote:
> From: Murali Nalajala <quic_mnalajal@...cinc.com>
> 
> Currently get_wq_ctx() is wrongly configured as a standard call.
> Here get_wq_ctx() must be an atomic call and can't be a standard
> SMC call because get_wq_ctx() should not sleep again. This
> situation lead to a deadlock. Hence mark get_wq_ctx() as
> atomic call.

That's quite a word salad.. could you try to make it clearer what
you're trying to achieve?

Konrad