| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20080526.192812.184590464.davem@davemloft.net> 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists