linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] genirq: procfs: Make smp_affinity read-only for interrupts marked with IRQD_AFFINITY

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]

Message-ID: <87msl0g8wl.ffs@tglx>
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2024 13:05:14 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: jeff.xie@...ux.dev
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xiehuan09@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] genirq: procfs: Make smp_affinity read-only for
 interrupts marked with IRQD_AFFINITY_MANAGED flag

On Sat, Aug 24 2024 at 14:54, jeff xie wrote:
>> This unlikely is a pointless exercise as this is not a hotpath
>> operation. Also please switch to S_IRUGO / S_IWUSR and simplify the
>> whole thing to:
>> 
>>  umode_t umode = S_IRUGO;
>> 
>>  if (!irqd_affinity_is_managed(&desc->irq_data))
>
> Okay, I will delete the unlikely.
>
> After thoroughly analyzing the code, I think it would be better to
> replace irqd_affinity_is_managed() with irq_can_set_affinity_usr()
> like below.  What do you think?
>  
>       if (irq_can_set_affinity_usr(desc->irq_data.irq))
>              umode |= S_IWUSR;

Makes sense