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, 15 Aug 2007 23:15:51 +0200 From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org> To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, horms@...ge.net.au, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rpjday@...dspring.com, ak@...e.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org, cfriesen@...tel.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, jesper.juhl@...il.com, zlynx@....org, schwidefsky@...ibm.com, Chris Snook <csnook@...hat.com>, davem@...emloft.net, wensong@...ux-vs.org, wjiang@...ilience.com, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently on frv > Please check the definition of "cache coherence". Which of the twelve thousand such definitions? :-) > Summary: the CPU is indeed within its rights to execute loads and > stores > to a single variable out of order, -but- only if it gets the same > result > that it would have obtained by executing them in order. Which means > that > any reordering of accesses by a single CPU to a single variable will be > invisible to the software. I'm still not sure if that applies to all architectures. Doesn't matter anyway, let's kill this thread :-) Segher - 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