linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] introduce macro spin_event

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: <ed82fe3e0903110948w542a864dj821106900755f14e@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 11 Mar 2009 11:48:05 -0500
From:	Timur Tabi <timur@...escale.com>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rdreier@...co.com,
	jirislaby@...il.com, peterz@...radead.org, will.newton@...il.com,
	hancockrwd@...il.com, jeremy@...p.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] introduce macro spin_event_timeout()

On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 7:37 PM, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:

> Given the proposed helper isn't a sane default for x86 I think it needs a
> good deal more work.

Alan, I'm happy to put whatever effort is requirement to make this
code satisfactory.  I believe that this is a useful macro to have in
the kernel.  I do appreciate the attention you are giving it.

> It also hides details like that timing which is bad
> sometimes.

Are you talking about the udelay() inside the loop?  If so, I agree
that this is bad and have removed it in the PowerPC-specific version:

#define spin_event_timeout(condition, timeout)			\
({								\
	unsigned long __start = get_tbl();			\
	unsigned long __loops = tb_ticks_per_usec * timeout;	\
	int __ret = 1;						\
	while (!(condition)) {					\
		if (tb_ticks_since(__start) > __loops) {	\
			__ret = 0;				\
			break;					\
		}						\
		cpu_relax();					\
	}							\
	__ret;							\
})

tb_ticks_since() is a front-end to get_tbl(), which is similar to the
rdtsc instruction.  In this case, we're not adding arbitrary delays
into the loop, and we're not using jiffies, but we are
architecture-dependent.

-- 
Timur Tabi
Linux kernel developer at Freescale
--
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/