linux-kernel - Re: Intel Memory Ordering White Paper

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]

Message-Id: <200709090334.27677.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Date:	Sun, 9 Sep 2007 03:34:27 +1000
From:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Jesse Barnes <jesse.barnes@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Intel Memory Ordering White Paper

On Saturday 08 September 2007 09:20, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Sep 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > So, can we finally noop smp_rmb and smp_wmb on x86?
>
> Did AMD already release their version? If so, we should probably add a
> commit that does that in somewhat early 2.6.24 rc, and add the pointers to
> the whitepapers in the commit message.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/white_papers_and_tech_docs/24593.pdf

AMD64 Architecture Programmer's Manual Volume 2: System Programming
section 7.2: Multiprocessor Memory Access Ordering, a paragraph on the
first page says

"Loads do not pass previous loads (loads are not re-ordered). Stores do
not pass previous stores (stores are not re-ordered)"

So, yes, it should be easy to do.
-
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/