linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] remove static declaration from wall clock version

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:	Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:50:26 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Glauber Costa <glommer@...hat.com>
Cc:	kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, avi@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove static declaration from wall clock version

On Thursday 26 February 2009, Glauber Costa wrote:
> @@ -548,15 +548,13 @@ static int do_set_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned index, u64 *data)
>  
>  static void kvm_write_wall_clock(struct kvm *kvm, gpa_t wall_clock)
>  {
> -       static int version;
> +       int version = 1;
>         struct pvclock_wall_clock wc;
>         struct timespec now, sys, boot;
>  
>         if (!wall_clock)
>                 return;
>  
> -       version++;
> -
>         kvm_write_guest(kvm, wall_clock, &version, sizeof(version));
>  
>         /*

Doesn't this mean that kvm_write_guest now writes an uninitialized value
to the guest?

I think what you need here is a 'static atomic_t version;' so you can
do an atomic_inc instead of the ++.

	Arnd <><
--
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/