linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] WorkStruct: Use direct assignment rather than cmpxchg()

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:	Thu, 07 Dec 2006 21:16:03 +0000
From:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...elEye.com>
Cc:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	torvalds@...l.org, davem@...emloft.com, wli@...omorphy.com,
	matthew@....cx, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] WorkStruct: Use direct assignment rather than cmpxchg() 

James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...elEye.com> wrote:

> That we'd have to put a conditional jump in there is an incorrect
> assumption on risc machines.

I didn't say we would *have* to put a conditional jump in there.  But I don't
know that I it can be avoided on all archs.

I don't know that sparc32 can do conditional instructions for example.  If we
force this assumption it becomes a potential limitation on the archs we can
support.  OTOH, it may be that every arch that supports SMP and has to emulate
bitops with spinlocks also supports conditional stores; but I don't know that.

David
-
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/