linux-kernel - Re: Why do we still have 32 bit counters? Interrupt counters overflow within 50 days

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:	Mon, 6 Oct 2014 09:54:14 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
cc:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Why do we still have 32 bit counters? Interrupt counters overflow
 within 50 days

On Sun, 5 Oct 2014, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Sun, 2014-10-05 at 23:49 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> 
> > Whats so hard about 64bit counters on 32bit machines?
> 
> Not hard, but not trivial either.
> 
> > 
> > > expensive to handle in particular because these counters are used in
> > > performance critical hotpaths.
> > 
> > The expensive overhead is a single "adcl" instruction.
> > 
> 
> Assuming a reader do not care of reading garbage yes, while carry is not
> yet propagated.

Readers and writers are serialized via desc->lock.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/