linux-kernel - memory barrier to ensure copy_to

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <379fb4870708310825o70509368l490ac9063ce09866@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 31 Aug 2007 17:25:55 +0200
From:	"anon... anon.al" <anon.asdf@...il.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: memory barrier to ensure copy_to_user() completes

Hi!

a)
Which memory barrier do I require if I need to ensure that a
copy_to_user(dest, src, len) completes before the next statement?

copy_to_user(dest, src, len) ;
//rmb(); OR wmb(); OR barrier(); OR mb(); ??????
//next statement;

I'm guessing:
Use rmb() to be sure that all of src is in registers, before continuing.
Use wmb() to be sure that all of src is actually written to dest
memory, before continuing.
?

b)

If I'm writing to hardware, and need to ensure the correct order, I'll
use wmb(), right?
e.g.:

#define HW_address1 20
#define HW_address2 40

*((int *)HW_address1) = 0x00000001;
wmb();  // is this good???
*((int *)HW_address2) = 0x00000010;

Thanks - Albert
-
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/