linux-kernel - Re: atomic RAM ?

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 08 Apr 2010 11:52:02 +0200
From:	Michael Schnell <mschnell@...ino.de>
To:	David Newall <davidn@...idnewall.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: atomic RAM ?

On 04/08/2010 11:28 AM, David Newall wrote:
> Will the system use multiple cores?  If it's only single core, perhaps
> atomic operations are really necessary?
At the moment I am just planning a single core NIOS project. But SMP is
a decent option for NIOS, as it is no hardware problem - and often has
been requested - to design multiple CPUs in a single in such an FPGA and
run SMP Linux on it.

OTOH, to do FUTEX in full (MMU) - Linux, atomic operations are
definitively necessary, as in Userland you can't disable the interrupt
without a Kernel call (which to avoid FUTEX is all about.) Currently the
plan with the NIOS (MMU, non-SMP) arch is to simulate atomic operations
with the said "atomic region" (as is done with e.g. the BlackFin arch).

(BTW.: when enumerating the ways how atomic macros are done I forgot to
mention the "new ARM" method: dedicated "load locked, store conditional"
operations that help simulating atomic behavior in user space without
the Kernel's help.)

-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/