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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 11:25:35 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org> To: Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk> cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>, Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] WorkStruct: Implement generic UP cmpxchg() where an arch doesn't support it On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Al Viro wrote: > > No. sparc32 doesn't have one, for instance. Ok. For SMP-safety, it's important that any architecture that can't do this needs to _share_ the same spinlock (on SMP only, of course) that it uses for the bitops. It would be good (but perhaps not as strict a requirement) if the atomic counters also use the same lock. But that is probably impossible on sparc32 (since it has a per-counter "lock"-like thing, iirc). So doing a cmpxchg() on an atomic_t would be a bug. Linus - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists