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:	Fri, 3 Jul 2009 10:38:06 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	paulus@...ba.org, arnd@...db.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] x86: atomic64_t: Improve atomic64_add_return()



On Fri, 3 Jul 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>  u64 atomic64_add_return(u64 delta, atomic64_t *ptr)
>  {
> +	/*
> +	 * Try first with a (probably incorrect) assumption about
> +	 * what we have there. We'll do two loops most likely,
> +	 * but we'll get an ownership MESI transaction straight away
> +	 * instead of a read transaction followed by a
> +	 * flush-for-ownership transaction:
> +	 */
> +	u64 old_val, new_val, real_val = 1ULL << 32;
>  
>  	do {
> +		old_val = real_val;
>  		new_val = old_val + delta;
>  
> +		real_val = atomic64_cmpxchg(ptr, old_val, new_val);
> +
> +	} while (real_val != old_val);

For the case where we actually have to keep looping until we succeed, 
we're probably better off starting with a good guess rather than a bad 
one.

So I'd suggest using 'real_val = 0', which gives smaller code, rather than 
the 1ull << 32 that is actively trying to be a bad guess.

It won't matter all that much (since 0 really isn't a much better guess 
than 1ull<<32), but I'd rather have a simple constant that doesn't matter, 
over an odd constant that makes no sense.

			Linus
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ