linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 15/31] arm64: SMP support

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: <20120817092133.GR11011@atomide.com>
Date:	Fri, 17 Aug 2012 02:21:33 -0700
From:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc:	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 15/31] arm64: SMP support

* Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com> [120814 11:05]:
> This patch adds SMP initialisation and spinlocks implementation for
> AArch64. The spinlock support uses the new load-acquire/store-release
> instructions to avoid explicit barriers. The architecture also specifies
> that an event is automatically generated when clearing the exclusive
> monitor state to wake up processors in WFE, so there is no need for an
> explicit DSB/SEV instruction sequence. The SEVL instruction is used to
> set the exclusive monitor locally as there is no conditional WFE and a
> branch is more expensive.

Do we always have SMP hardware on arm64? Or are we going to need to
again add smp_on_up support later on?

Other than that:

Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
--
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/