linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2]: atomic_t: Remove volatile from atomic

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:	Wed, 19 May 2010 12:54:49 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc:	npiggin@...e.de, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, anton@...ba.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, willy@...ux.intel.com,
	benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2]: atomic_t: Remove volatile from atomic_t definition

From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 08:01:32 -0700

> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 11:03:27PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
>> For atomic_read it shouldn't matter unless gcc is *really* bad at it.
>> Ah, for atomic_read, the required semantic is surely ACCESS_ONCE, so
>> that's where the volatile is needed? (maybe it would be clearer to
>> explicitly use ACCESS_ONCE?)
> 
> Explicit use of ACCESS_ONCE() where needed makes a lot of sense to me,
> and allows better code to be generated for initialization and cleanup
> code where no other task has access to the atomic_t.

I agree and I want to see this too, but I think with the tree the size
that it is we have to work backwards at this point.

Existing behavior by default, and optimized cases get tagged by using
a new interface (atomic_read_light(), test_bit{,s}_light(), etc.)
--
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/