linux-kernel - Re: Difference between atomic operations and memory barriers

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: <E1A2BB8B-F291-4C9E-B095-39F0AE7A0587@noahdesu.com>
Date:	Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:07:27 -0700
From:	Noah Watkins <noah@...hdesu.com>
To:	"Leonidas ." <leonidas137@...il.com>
Cc:	Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, noah@...hdesu.com
Subject: Re: Difference between atomic operations and memory barriers


> So we can safely assume that pointer assignment will be done in an
> atomic manner?

See the the comment above rcu_assign_pointer in
include/linux/rcupdate.h

-noah

> -Leo.

--
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/