linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf_counter: dynamically allocate tasks' perf_counter

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Fri, 22 May 2009 10:06:24 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Corey Ashford <cjashfor@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf_counter: dynamically allocate tasks'
 perf_counter_context struct [v2]

On Fri, 2009-05-22 at 14:17 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> +               /*
> +                * Make sure other cpus see correct values for *ctx
> +                * once task->perf_counter_ctxp is visible to them.
> +                */
> +               smp_wmb();
> +               tctx = cmpxchg(&task->perf_counter_ctxp, NULL, ctx);


Documentation/memory-barriers.txt:

> Any atomic operation that modifies some state in memory and returns information
> about the state (old or new) implies an SMP-conditional general memory barrier
> (smp_mb()) on each side of the actual operation (with the exception of
> explicit lock operations, described later).  These include:

>         cmpxchg();




--
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/