linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] asynchronous page fault.

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: <20091228005746.GE3601@balbir.in.ibm.com>
Date:	Mon, 28 Dec 2009 06:27:46 +0530
From:	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	"minchan.kim@...il.com" <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
	cl@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] asynchronous page fault.

* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> [2009-12-27 12:19:56]:

> Your changelog states as much.
> 
> "Even if RB-tree rotation occurs while we walk tree for look-up, we just
> miss vma without oops."
> 
> However, since this is the case, do we still need the
> rcu_assign_pointer() conversion your patch does? All I can see it do is
> slow down all RB-tree users, without any gain.

Don't we need the rcu_assign_pointer() on the read side primarily to
make sure the pointer is still valid and assignments (writes) are not
re-ordered? Are you suggesting that the pointer assignment paths be
completely atomic?

-- 
	Balbir
--
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/