linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 09/18] fs: rework icount to be a locked variable

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, 8 Oct 2010 09:16:54 -0400
From:	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/18] fs: rework icount to be a locked variable

On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 10:17:14AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 06:50:01PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > There's no need to lock a normal 32-bit variable for readers.
> > 
> > Ok, but will need a memory barrier instead?
> 
> Isn't spin_unlock supposed to be one?  I'll need some of the locking
> experts to shime in.

Not really a locking expert, but the locking operations are supposed to
have an implicit barrier.

-chris

--
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/