linux-kernel - Re: MMIO and gcc re-ordering issue

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 26 May 2008 19:28:12 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	benh@...nel.crashing.org
Cc:	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, scottwood@...escale.com,
	linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	tpiepho@...escale.com
Subject: Re: MMIO and gcc re-ordering issue

From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 12:15:40 +1000

> Some of them. USB comes to mind. I'd be happy to make it "the rule" and
> document that MMIO vs. coherent access aren't implicitely ordered. I
> would still keep them ordered on powerpc for a little while tho until
> I'm happy enough with driver auditing.
> 
> But heh, it's you who was telling me that it would be a bad engineering
> decision and we had to make everybody look like x86 & fully ordered :-)
> I decided to agree back then and stuck all those nasty heavy barriers
> in the powerpc variants of readl/writel/...

I still believe this.

It's just another complicated thing for driver authors to get wrong.
The other side of the coin is of course the cost.

The only thing I am absolutely sure of is that we should make a
decision fast, document it, and just stick to it.
--
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/