linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv5 04/16] VFS: add memory barrier to sb_mark_clean and sb_mark

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:	Sun, 06 Jun 2010 20:16:20 +0300
From:	Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@...ia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 04/16] VFS: add memory barrier to sb_mark_clean and
 sb_mark_dirty

On Sun, 2010-06-06 at 17:50 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>  void sb_mark_dirty(struct super_block *sb);
>  static inline void sb_mark_clean(struct super_block *sb)
>  {
>  	sb->s_dirty = 0;
> +	/*
> +	 * Normally FSes first unset the sb->s_dirty flag, and then start
> +	 * synchronizing the SB. The memory barrier ensures this order.
> +	 */
> +	smp_mb();
...
>  void sb_mark_dirty(struct super_block *sb)
>  {
> +	/*
> +	 * Normally FSes modify the SB, and then mark it as dirty. The memory
> +	 * barrier ensures this order.
> +	 */
> +	smp_mb();
...

Hmm, these ones should be 'mb()', not 'smp_mb()'.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)

--
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/