linux-kernel - Re: [cpuops cmpxchg double V2 1/4] Generic support for this_cpu_cmpxchg

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, 21 Jan 2011 11:50:29 -0600 (CST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [cpuops cmpxchg double V2 1/4] Generic support for
 this_cpu_cmpxchg_double

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:

> > this_cpu_cmpxchg_double(percpu_dd, oldword1, oldword2, newword1, newword2)
> >
> > with the problem of type checking
>
> What is the problem with type checking here ?

You need to know the fields in the struct to do the type checking with
each of the other parameters.

> We could use a gcc builtin like the following to check if the alignment of
> "percpu_dd" meets the double-cas requirements:
>
> #define testmacro(a, b) \
>         __builtin_choose_expr(__alignof__(a) >= 2 * sizeof(unsigned long), \
>                               ((a).low) = (b), \    /* success */
>                               ((a).low) = (void) 0) /* compile-error */
>
> > or
> >
> > this_cpu_cmpxchg_double(percpu_dd, old_dd, new_dd)
> >
> > with the problem of 128 bit constants/structs passed by value.
>
> Yeah, I guess trying to deal with 128-bit value might be a bit tricky. But
> having something sane and with compile-time-checked alignment for the percpu_dd
> type is not to be looked over.

The existing implementation could be equipped to do a compile time check
for the proper alignment if the pointer passed is constant.


--
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/