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: <4AE6C998.9040405@lumino.de>
Date:	Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:21:12 +0100
From:	Michael Schnell <mschnell@...ino.de>
To:	"Leonidas ." <leonidas137@...il.com>
CC:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>,
	Noah Watkins <noah@...hdesu.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Difference between atomic operations and memory barriers

Leonidas . wrote:
> 
> any_t *ptr = something;
> 
> is always atomic even on SMPs without using locks, barriers then my
> doubt is cleared. Thanks.

I assume that this only holds if the pointer (not the thing it points
to) is denoted as volatile.

-Michael
--
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/