linux-kernel - Re: Opteron Rev E has a bug ... a locked instruction doesn't act as a read-acquire barrier

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: <18583.883.70907.983634@harpo.it.uu.se>
Date:	Mon, 4 Aug 2008 15:26:11 +0200
From:	Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>
To:	Arkadiusz Miskiewicz <arekm@...en.pl>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Opteron Rev E has a bug ... a locked  instruction doesn't act as a read-acquire barrier

Arkadiusz Miskiewicz writes:
 > 
 > Hello,
 > 
 > http://google-perftools.googlecode.com/svn-history/r48/trunk/src/base/atomicops-internals-x86.cc
 > says
 > 
 > "  // Opteron Rev E has a bug in which on very rare occasions a locked
 >   // instruction doesn't act as a read-acquire barrier if followed by a
 >   // non-locked read-modify-write instruction.  Rev F has this bug in 
 >   // pre-release versions, but not in versions released to customers,
 >   // so we test only for Rev E, which is family 15, model 32..63 inclusive.
 >   if (strcmp(vendor, "AuthenticAMD") == 0 &&       // AMD
 >       family == 15 &&
 >       32 <= model && model <= 63) {
 >     AtomicOps_Internalx86CPUFeatures.has_amd_lock_mb_bug = true;
 >   } else {
 >     AtomicOps_Internalx86CPUFeatures.has_amd_lock_mb_bug = false;
 >   }
 > "
 > 
 > does kernel have quirk/workaround for this? I'm looking at arch/x86/kernel/cpu 
 > but I don't see workaround related to this (possibly I'm overlooking).

I can find no reference to this alleged RevE erratum in the
Athlon64/Opteron revision guide (25759.pdf).

But if this bug is real then we need to know about it. Could
you ask the author of the code you quoted above to clarify?

/Mikael
--
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/