From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linutronix.de (146.0.238.70:993) by crypto-ml.lab.linutronix.de with IMAP4-SSL for ; 22 Jan 2019 07:27:03 -0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1glqSa-0006O5-QA for speck@linutronix.de; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 08:27:02 +0100 Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2019 08:26:52 +0100 From: Greg KH Subject: [MODERATED] Re: [PATCH v5 09/27] MDSv5 23 Message-ID: <20190122072652.GA7082@kroah.com> References: <686b021bb4e5923a03e992f28770e4c06ab0662b.1547858934.git.ak@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <686b021bb4e5923a03e992f28770e4c06ab0662b.1547858934.git.ak@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: speck@linutronix.de List-ID: On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 04:50:24PM -0800, speck for Andi Kleen wrote: > +Hard interrupts, tasklets, timers which can run asynchronous are > +assumed to touch random user data, unless they have been audited, and > +marked with NO_USER flags. Are you missing a "not" in that sentence somewhere? As written, this doesn't make much sense to me. > +Most interrupt handlers for modern devices should not touch > +user data, because they rely on DMA and only manipulate > +pointers. This needs auditing to confirm though. You don't ever really define what "user data" is in this file, to help people in trying to audit this type of thing. For example, are keystrokes "user data"? Is block i/o? thanks, greg k-h