linux-kernel - Re: [cpuops cmpxchg double V1 1/4] Generic support for this_cpu_cmpxchg

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1101031640380.31274@router.home>
Date:	Mon, 3 Jan 2011 16:43:26 -0600 (CST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [cpuops cmpxchg double V1 1/4] Generic support for
 this_cpu_cmpxchg_double

On Mon, 27 Dec 2010, Tejun Heo wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 05:55:22PM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Sat, 25 Dec 2010, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >
> > > ABI.  But that said, it might still be problematic on other
> > > architectures when we try to apply it to different architectures.  Is
> > > everyone against just taking a scalar for the first variable instead
> > > of taking a pointer?  I'd be happier with that than the current one.
> >
> > How about replacing that with two scalars? Macro will check that the
> > scalaers are properly aligned and that the second follows the first. Then
> > there is also better symmetry in the parameters.
> >
> > bool this_cpu_cmpxchg_double(
> >           percpu_1, percpu_2
> >           old_1, old_2
> >           new_1, new_2
> > )
>
> Yeah, maybe.  The interface is a bit redundant but probably the most
> fool proof.  I'm okay with either taking a single scalar or both.

The single large 128 bit scalar does not work. Having to define an
additional structure it also a bit clumsy. I think its best to get another
patchset out that also duplicates the first parameter and makes the percpu
variable specs conform to the other this_cpu ops.

Still on vacation so it may take to the end of the week for me to get this
done.

--
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/