linux-kernel - Re: [BUG FIX] Make x86_32 uni-processor Atomic ops, Atomic

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: <adak5499c0b.fsf@cisco.com>
Date:	Fri, 22 May 2009 12:24:36 -0700
From:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To:	"Michael S. Zick" <mszick@...ethan.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUG FIX] Make x86_32 uni-processor Atomic ops, Atomic

 > Unless you have interrupts enabled, then you have two contexts.
 > Only xchg is "naturally" atomic.

Isn't the lock prefix about consistency between multiple processors?
The x86 architecture always handles interrupts on instruction
boundaries.  I'm guessing you're worried about definitions like

static inline void atomic_inc(atomic_t *v)
{
	asm volatile(LOCK_PREFIX "incl %0"
		     : "+m" (v->counter));
}

which compiles to just "incl" (with no lock prefix) on uniprocessor
kernels; but the IA-32 architecture guarantees that the incl instruction
cannot be interrupted between reading the old value and writing the new
value.

 - 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/