linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC/RFB] x86_64, i386: interrupt dispatch changes

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 04 Nov 2008 16:50:23 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
CC:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...tmail.fm>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
	Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...lshack.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, lguest@...abs.org,
	jeremy@...source.com, Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
	Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC/RFB] x86_64, i386: interrupt dispatch changes

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
>> ???  LOCK slowness is not because of the bus. And I know you know that
>> Ingo, so I don't know why you wrote that bogosity above.
>>   
> 
> Why are the accesses locked?  Is it because it does an update of the
> accessed bit in the descriptor?  (We should be pre-setting them all
> anyway.)
> 

It is, but the locked access is unconditional.  Similar to any other
read/modify/write transaction -- the write is required to release the lock.

	-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/