linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] static keys: fix test/set races

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:	Sat, 29 Jun 2013 09:20:16 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	jbaron@...mai.com
Cc:	rostedt@...dmis.org, andi@...stfloor.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] static keys: fix test/set races


* jbaron@...mai.com <jbaron@...mai.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> As pointed out by Andi Kleen, some static key users can be racy because they
> check the value of the key->enabled, and then subsequently update the branch
> direction. A number of call sites have 'higher' level locking that avoids this
> race, but the usage in the scheduler features does not. See:
> http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1304.2/01655.html

But that's not an issue at all - switching the scheduler features is for 
development and debugging only, and in some cases higher level locking 
would be needed to solve it 'properly', beyond what the keys API could 
give ...

So this is pretty pointless, sorry, please don't complicate this facility.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/