linux-kernel - Re: Introduce atomic_dec_and_lock

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:   Fri, 4 May 2018 17:26:40 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Introduce atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave()

On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:21:02PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 06:07:26PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> 
> > do you intend to kill refcount_dec_and_lock() in the longterm?
> 
> You meant to say atomic_dec_and_lock() ? Dunno if we ever get there, but
> typically dec_and_lock is fairly refcounty, but I suppose it is possible
> to have !refcount users, in which case we're eternally stuck with it.

Yes, there are - consider e.g.

void iput(struct inode *inode)
{ 
        if (!inode)
                return;
        BUG_ON(inode->i_state & I_CLEAR);
retry:
        if (atomic_dec_and_lock(&inode->i_count, &inode->i_lock)) {

inode->i_count sure as hell isn't refcount_t fodder...