linux-kernel - Re: [patch 134/149] x86, paravirt: Add a global synchronization point for pvclock

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: <4C3DFA88.5020007@goop.org>
Date:	Wed, 14 Jul 2010 10:57:28 -0700
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Palfrader <peter@...frader.org>,
	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org,
	stable-review@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, Glauber Costa <glommer@...hat.com>,
	Zachary Amsden <zamsden@...hat.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 134/149] x86, paravirt: Add a global synchronization point
 	for pvclock

On 07/14/2010 10:45 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 07/14/2010 10:34 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>   
>> On 07/14/2010 10:30 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>     
>>> If gcc ever starts reordering volatile operations, including "asm
>>> volatile", the kernel will break, and will be unfixable.  Just about
>>> every single driver will break.  All over the kernel we're explicitly or
>>> implicitly making the assumption that volatile operations are strictly
>>> ordered by the compiler with respect to each other.
>>>       
>> Can you give an example?  All the cases I've seen rely on the ordering
>> properties of "memory" clobbers, which is sound.  (And volatile
>> variables are a completely unrelated issue, of course.)
>>
>>     
> I/O ports, for example.
>   

Yes, it looks like they should have memory barriers if we want them to
be ordered with respect to normal writes; afaict "asm volatile" has
never had strict ordering wrt memory ops.

Anything else?

    J
--
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/