linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03 of 36] x86: add memory barriers to wrmsr

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]

Date:	Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:18:31 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...nel.org>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
CC:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
	xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	Stephen Tweedie <sct@...hat.com>,
	Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@...hat.com>,
	Mark McLoughlin <markmc@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03 of 36] x86: add memory barriers to wrmsr

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>>>   
>> I suppose, though I would be inclined to put the barriers in the
>> wrmsr macro itself to act as documentation. 
> 
> 
> yeah I meant like this:
> 
> static inline void native_write_msr(unsigned int msr,
>  				    unsigned low, unsigned high)
> {
> 	barrier();
> 	asm volatile("wrmsr" : : "c" (msr), "a"(low), "d" (high));
> 	barrier();
> }
> 
> or in the same in the thing that calls this.
> 

Actually, I believe the barrier(); before is actually incorrect, since 
it would affect the wrmsr() register arguments rather than the wrmsr 
instruction itself.

	-hpa
--
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/