linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] percpu: fix generic definition of __this_cpu_add_and

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: <20120228201009.GB3252@dhcp-172-17-108-109.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date:	Wed, 29 Feb 2012 05:10:09 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc:	Torsten Kaiser <just.for.lkml@...glemail.com>,
	Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] percpu: fix generic definition of
 __this_cpu_add_and_return()

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 09:43:15AM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012, Torsten Kaiser wrote:
> 
> > >  #define __this_cpu_sub_return(pcp, val)        this_cpu_add_return(pcp, -(val))
> >
> > I think, the same fix should be applied to the lines following this patch:
> > #define __this_cpu_sub_return(pcp, val) this_cpu_add_return(pcp, -(val))
> > #define __this_cpu_inc_return(pcp)      this_cpu_add_return(pcp, 1)
> > #define __this_cpu_dec_return(pcp)      this_cpu_add_return(pcp, -1)
> >
> > Shouldn't these other operations also only give the __ relaxed guarantees?
> Yes indeed that should also be fixed.

Can someone please send a patch for this? :)

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/