linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] jump label: 2.6.38 updates

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]

Message-ID: <20110211222742.GB9148@redhat.com>
Date:	Fri, 11 Feb 2011 17:27:42 -0500
From:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
To:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, hpa@...or.com,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de,
	andi@...stfloor.org, roland@...hat.com, rth@...hat.com,
	masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
	avi@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net, sam@...nborg.org,
	ddaney@...iumnetworks.com, michael@...erman.id.au,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] jump label: 2.6.38 updates

On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 05:20:25PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra (peterz@...radead.org) wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 16:13 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > 
> > > Thoughts ? 
> > 
> >  #if defined(CC_HAVE_ASM_GOTO) && defined(CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL)
> > +
> > +struct jump_label_key {
> > +       void *ptr;
> > +};
> > 
> >  struct jump_label_entry {
> >         struct hlist_node hlist;
> >         struct jump_entry *table;
> > -       int nr_entries;
> >         /* hang modules off here */
> >         struct hlist_head modules;
> >         unsigned long key;
> > +       u32 nr_entries;
> > +       int refcount;
> >  };
> > 
> > #else
> > 
> > +struct jump_label_key {
> > +       int state;
> > +};
> > 
> > #endif
> > 
> > So why can't we make that jump_label_entry::refcount and
> > jump_label_key::state an atomic_t and be done with it?
> > 
> > Then the enabled case uses if (atomic_inc_return(&key->ptr->refcount) ==
> > 1), and the disabled atomic_inc(&key->state).
> > 
> 
> OK, by "enabled" you mean #if defined(CC_HAVE_ASM_GOTO) &&
> defined(CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL), and "disabled", the #else.
> 
> I guess the only downside is the extra volatile for the atomic_read for
> the fallback case, which is not really much of problem realistically
> speaking: anyway, the volatile is a good thing to have in the fallback
> case to force the compiler to re-read the variable. Let's go with your
> idea.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mathieu
> 

ok, I'll try and re-spin the interface based around atomic_t, if we are all
agreed...there was also a circular dependency issue with atomic.h including
kernel.h which included jump_label.h, and that was why we had a separate,
jump_label_ref.h header file, but hopefully I can be resolve that in a clean
way.

thanks,

-Jason
--
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/