linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 13/13] rcutorture: formal: prepare for ACCESS

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:   Tue, 10 Oct 2017 05:47:12 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/13] rcutorture: formal: prepare for ACCESS_ONCE()
 removal

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 10:54:14AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 12:51:12PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 07:28:50PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/formal/srcu-cbmc/src/barriers.h b/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/formal/srcu-cbmc/src/barriers.h
> > > index 6687acc..ee4e4f8 100644
> > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/formal/srcu-cbmc/src/barriers.h
> > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/formal/srcu-cbmc/src/barriers.h
> > > @@ -34,8 +34,9 @@
> > >  #define rs_smp_mb() do {} while (0)
> > >  #endif
> > > 
> > > -#define ACCESS_ONCE(x) (*(volatile typeof(x) *) &(x))
> > > -#define READ_ONCE(x) ACCESS_ONCE(x)
> > > -#define WRITE_ONCE(x, val) (ACCESS_ONCE(x) = (val))
> > > +#define __ACCESS_ONCE(x) (*(volatile typeof(x) *) &(x))
> > > +#define ACCESS_ONCE(x) __ACCESS_ONCE(x)
> > > +#define READ_ONCE(x) __ACCESS_ONCE(x)
> > > +#define WRITE_ONCE(x, val) (__ACCESS_ONCE(x) = (val))
> > 
> > How about something like the following?
> > 
> > #define READ_ONCE(x) (*(volatile typeof(x) *) &(x))
> > #define WRITE_ONCE(x) ((*(volatile typeof(x) *) &(x)) = (val))
> 
> Sure; folded in and pushed out. :)

Thank you!

> I've assumed that the ACCESS_ONCE() definition needs to be kept until
> that's ripped out treewide. Please shout if that's not the case!

You have it right.  This case is an exception because this code is
used only by RCU, which has long since had ACCESS_ONCE() ripped out.

							Thanx, Paul