linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86/panic: Add x86_panic_handler as default post-panic behavior

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: <7e6ffff3-30ec-49ff-b6a8-f36b61119ae0@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 14:56:42 -0500
From: Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao.osdev@...il.com>
To: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>, carlos.bilbao@...nel.org,
 tglx@...utronix.de, seanjc@...gle.com, jan.glauber@...il.com
Cc: bilbao@...edu, pmladek@...e.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
 jani.nikula@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, takakura@...inux.co.jp
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86/panic: Add x86_panic_handler as default
 post-panic behavior

Hello,

On 4/30/25 02:58, John Ogness wrote:
> On 2025-04-29, Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao.osdev@...il.com> wrote:
>>> I see no reason why you don't just use safe_halt() as your panic
>>> handler.
>> Yes, in my original implementation I simply used halt, but I was
>> trying to be cautious in case any remaining messages hadn't flushed. I
>> wonder, can we be certain that, as you said, all output (e.g., a
>> backtrace) has already been displayed on screen at this point? I'm not
>> sure.
> Well, without this series, the kernel goes into an infinite loop. So if
> the messages are not all out, they won't magically appear during the
> infinite loop either.


I thought there may be some async stuff going on :)


>
> John


Thanks,

Carlos