linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] NVMe: Fix compilation on architecturs without readq/writeq

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, 19 Jan 2012 17:21:31 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@...el.com>,
	Roland Dreier <roland@...estorage.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Hitoshi Mitake <h.mitake@...il.com>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...allels.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...radead.org,
	hpa@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NVMe: Fix compilation on architecturs without readq/writeq

On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Matthew Wilcox
<matthew.r.wilcox@...el.com> wrote:
> The only places that uses readq/writeq are in the initialisation
> path.  Since they're not performance critical, always use readl/writel.

The arch rules are that i fthe architecture has readq/writeq, they
will be #define'd (they may be inline functions, but there will be a

  #define readq readq

to make it visible to the preprocessor as well).

So if you don't need the atomicity guarantees of a "real" readq, you
can do this instead:

  #ifndef readq
  static inline u64 readq(void __iomem *addr)
  {
        return readl(addr) | (((u64) readl(addr + 4)) << 32LL);
  }
  #endif

and then use readq() as if it existed.

And I do think we should expose this in some generic manner. Because
we currently don't, we already have that pattern copied in quite a few
drivers.

Maybe <asm-generic/io-nonatomic.h> or something? Making it clear that
its not atomic, but avoiding the silly duplication we do now..

This whole mess was introduced in commit dbee8a0affd5 ("x86: remove
32-bit versions of readq()/writeq()"), and it already talked about the
problems but didn't help with the drivers that simply don't care.

All the people in those threads were doing their self-satisfied
"writeq is broken", without much acknowledging that 99% of users
simply don't seem to care.

"Occupy Writeq - We are the 99%"

                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/