linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 15/16] time: Update tiemkeeper structure using a local shadow

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]

Date:	Thu, 17 Nov 2011 14:03:22 -0800
From:	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/16] time: Update tiemkeeper structure using a local
 shadow

On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 20:04 -0800, John Stultz wrote:
> Uses a local shadow structure to update the timekeeper. This
> reduces the timekeeper.lock hold time.
> 
> WARNING: This introduces a race, but the window might be provably
> so small as to not be observable. This patch needs lots more math
> and comments to validate that assumption.

Bah. After thinking about it, this patch won't work, since it would
possibly lose updates via settimeofday(), etc.

So I'm coming around to Thomas' double lock reader-seq/writer-lock
method.

thanks
-john

--
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/