linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 09/15] PM / Hibernate: user, implement user

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:	Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:36:42 +0100
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@...a.org.au>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: [RFC 09/15] PM / Hibernate: user, implement user_ops writer

On Wed 2010-03-24 22:40:56, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 03/24/2010 09:42 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >> +	if (test_bit(TODO_CLOSED, to_do_flags))
> >> +		return -EIO;
> >> +
> >> +	to_do_buf = buf;
> >> +	wmb();
> >> +	set_bit(TODO_WORK, to_do_flags);
> >> +	wake_up_interruptible(&to_do_wait);
> > 
> > Uhuh, open-coded barriers... these need to be commented, and I guess
> > you just should not play this kind of trickery.
> 
> It's just to ensure the to_do_buf store is not reordered with the
> set_bit. I wanted to avoid locks as too heavy tools here.

Locks are the only sane choice here. Open coding them is not an option.
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/