linux-kernel - Re: arch/x86/Kconfig selects invalid HAVE_READQ, HAVE

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:	Tue, 21 Apr 2009 10:23:34 -0700
From:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Hitoshi Mitake <h.mitake@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...shcourse.ca>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: arch/x86/Kconfig selects invalid HAVE_READQ, HAVE_WRITEQ vars

 > > However I worry that this just leaves driver authors too much rope.
 > > Choosing readq_atomic() vs. readq() is just one more thing to get wrong.

 > ... as is having each driver implementing their own substitutes.

Yes, I agree with that.  However at least status quo ante (readq/writeq
64-bit only) means that driver authors who use readq/writeq are forced
(by a compile error) to spend a little thought on what 32-bit fallback
they should use.

I guess one possibility is to make readq/writeq the atomic version, and
add readq_nonatomic()/writeq_nonatomic() for 32-bit architectures.  Then
it's much more opt-in -- but then that makes the (perhaps) more common
case look a bit uglier.

 - R.
--
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/