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  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:	Wed, 27 Jun 2007 16:30:15 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Davide Libenzi <>
To:	Linus Torvalds <>
cc:	Nick Piggin <>,
	Eric Dumazet <>,
	Chuck Ebbert <>, Ingo Molnar <>,
	Jarek Poplawski <>,
	Miklos Szeredi <>,,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,, Andrew Morton <>
Subject: Re: [BUG] long freezes on thinkpad t60

On Wed, 27 Jun 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> > IOW shouldn't an mfence always be there? Not only loads could leak up 
> > into the wait phase, but stores too, if they have no dependency with the 
> > "head" and "tail" loads.
> Stores never "leak up". They only ever leak down (ie past subsequent loads 
> or stores), so you don't need to worry about them. That's actually already 
> documented (although not in those terms), and if it wasn't true, then we 
> couldn't do the spin unlock with just a regular store anyway.

Yes, Intel has never done that. They'll probably never do it since it'll 
break a lot of system software (unless they use a new mode-bit that 
allows system software to enable lose-ordering). Although I clearly 
remember to have read in one of their P4 optimization manuals to not 
assume this in the future.

- Davide

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists