linux-kernel - Re: sparc64 cmpxchg is not a full memory barrier anymore ?

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:	Fri, 23 Oct 2009 08:33:27 -0400
From:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	nickpiggin@...oo.com.au, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: sparc64 cmpxchg is not a full memory barrier anymore ?

* David Miller (davem@...emloft.net) wrote:
> From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:32:42 -0400
> 
> > The same applies to the other atomic instructions we find in this list.
> > How is the correct ordering of loads wrt to cmxchg (and other atomic
> > ops) still ensured by this modification?
> 
> All actual sparc64 chips implement more strict ordering than
> the V9 specification permits.  The memory barriers were just
> nops and actually not doing anything more than the chip
> already does for us.

OK. Perhaps adding a comment to that effect near sparc mb()
implementation would be appropriate ?

Thanks,

Mathieu


-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
--
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/