From: matt@codeblueprint.co.uk (Matt Fleming)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCHv2 0/6] efi: detect erroneous firmware IRQ manipulation
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 11:51:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160425105153.GR2829@codeblueprint.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160425104009.GD25087@leverpostej>
On Mon, 25 Apr, at 11:40:09AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>
> It looks like irqs_disabled_flags() will do what you expect, and ignore
> everything but the interrupt flag.
>
> However, for ARM that will ignore the other exceptions we've seen FW
> erroneously unmask (e.g. FIQ), which is unfortunate, as fiddling with
> those is just as disastrous.
Bah, right.
> Would you be happy with an arch_efi_call_check_flags(before, after),
> instead? That way we can make the flags we check arch-specific.
Could we just make the flag mask arch-specific instead of the call
since the rest of efi_call_virt_check_flags() is good?
Something like this (uncompiled, untested, half-baked),
---
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c
index c38b1cfc26e2..057d00bee7d6 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c
@@ -25,9 +25,12 @@
static void efi_call_virt_check_flags(unsigned long flags, const char *call)
{
unsigned long cur_flags;
+ bool mismatch;
local_save_flags(cur_flags);
- if (!WARN_ON_ONCE(cur_flags != flags))
+
+ mismatch = (cur_flags ^ flags) & ARCH_EFI_IRQ_FLAGS_MASK;
+ if (!WARN_ON_ONCE(mismatch))
return;
add_taint(TAINT_FIRMWARE_WORKAROUND, LOCKDEP_NOW_UNRELIABLE);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-25 10:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-22 13:51 [PATCHv2 0/6] efi: detect erroneous firmware IRQ manipulation Mark Rutland
2016-04-22 13:51 ` [PATCHv2 1/6] efi/runtime-wrappers: add {__,}efi_call_virt templates Mark Rutland
2016-04-24 21:12 ` Matt Fleming
2016-04-22 13:51 ` [PATCHv2 2/6] arm64/efi: move to generic {__,}efi_call_virt Mark Rutland
2016-04-22 13:51 ` [PATCHv2 3/6] arm/efi: " Mark Rutland
2016-04-22 13:51 ` [PATCHv2 4/6] x86/efi: " Mark Rutland
2016-04-22 13:51 ` [PATCHv2 5/6] efi/runtime-wrappers: remove redundant ifdefs Mark Rutland
2016-04-22 13:51 ` [PATCHv2 6/6] efi/runtime-wrappers: detect FW irq flag corruption Mark Rutland
2016-04-24 21:17 ` Matt Fleming
2016-04-22 14:12 ` [PATCHv2 0/6] efi: detect erroneous firmware IRQ manipulation Ard Biesheuvel
2016-04-24 21:22 ` Matt Fleming
2016-04-25 10:15 ` Matt Fleming
2016-04-25 10:21 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-04-25 10:28 ` Matt Fleming
2016-04-25 10:40 ` Mark Rutland
2016-04-25 10:51 ` Matt Fleming [this message]
2016-04-25 11:04 ` Mark Rutland
2016-04-25 11:19 ` Matt Fleming
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160425105153.GR2829@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--to=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).