[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87a54kil52.ffs@tglx>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2025 14:45:45 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Hogan Wang <hogan.wang@...wei.com>, x86@...nel.org,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
alex.williamson@...hat.com
Cc: weidong.huang@...wei.com, yechuan@...wei.com, hogan.wang@...wei.com,
wangxinxin.wang@...wei.com, jianjay.zhou@...wei.com, wangjie88@...wei.com,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/irq: Plug vector setup race
On Thu, Jul 24 2025 at 12:49, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Hogan!
> Hogan reported a vector setup race, which overwrites the interrupt
> descriptor in the per CPU vector array resulting in a disfunctional device.
>
> CPU0 CPU1
> interrupt is raised in APIC IRR
> but not handled
> free_irq()
> per_cpu(vector_irq, CPU1)[vector] = VECTOR_SHUTDOWN;
>
> request_irq() common_interrupt()
> d = this_cpu_read(vector_irq[vector]);
>
> per_cpu(vector_irq, CPU1)[vector] = desc;
>
> if (d == VECTOR_SHUTDOWN)
> this_cpu_write(vector_irq[vector], VECTOR_UNUSED);
>
> free_irq() cannot observe the pending vector in the CPU1 APIC as there is
> no way to query the remote CPUs APIC IRR.
>
> This requires that request_irq() uses the same vector/CPU as the one which
> was freed, but this also can be triggered by a spurious interrupt.
>
> Prevent this by reevaluating vector_irq under the vector lock, which is
> held by the interrupt activation code when vector_irq is updated.
Does this fix your problem?
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists