On 29/07/2019 09:49, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 29.07.19 10:34, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 29/07/2019 05:36, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> Continuing on the stack saved by __prepare_to_wait() on the wrong cpu
>>> is rather dangerous.
>>>
>>> Instead of doing so just call the scheduler again as it already is
>>> happening in the similar case in __prepare_to_wait() when doing the
>>> setjmp() would be wrong.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <[email protected]>
>>
>> I'm afraid this is still problematic.  By successfully invoking the
>> waitqueue, we know that no spinlocks were held, but we have no guarantee
>> that e.g. an xmalloc()'d pointer is still only stashed in the stack.
>
> But how are the domain_crash() invocations with following do_softirq()
> calls in the __prepare_to_wait() case fine then?

You make a very good point.

Seeing as this patch returns it to "no worse than before", and this code
isn't long for the world anyway, Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper
<[email protected]>

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Reply via email to