linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc: spinlock: Fix spin_unlock

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 Jun 2016 13:56:55 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc:	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc: spinlock: Fix spin_unlock_wait()

On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 09:42:20PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> +static inline void arch_spin_unlock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> +{
> +	arch_spinlock_t lock_val;
> +
> +	smp_mb();
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Atomically load and store back the lock value (unchanged). This
> +	 * ensures that our observation of the lock value is ordered with
> +	 * respect to other lock operations.
> +	 */
> +	__asm__ __volatile__(
> +"1:	" PPC_LWARX(%0, 0, %2, 0) "\n"
> +"	stwcx. %0, 0, %2\n"
> +"	bne- 1b\n"
> +	: "=&r" (lock_val), "+m" (*lock)
> +	: "r" (lock)
> +	: "cr0", "xer");
> +
> +	if (arch_spin_value_unlocked(lock_val))
> +		goto out;
> +
> +	while (!arch_spin_value_unlocked(*lock)) {
> +		HMT_low();
> +		if (SHARED_PROCESSOR)
> +			__spin_yield(lock);
> +	}
> +	HMT_medium();
> +
> +out:
> +	smp_mb();
> +}

Why the move to in-line this implementation? It looks like a fairly big
function.