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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2013 17:42:33 -0400 From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> To: Eric Wong <normalperson@...t.net> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com> Subject: [RFC PATCH] wfcqueue: implement __wfcq_enqueue_head() Implement enqueue-to-head. It can run concurrently with enqueue and splice to queue, but requires a mutex against all other queue operations. Useful for special-cases where a queue needs to have nodes enqueued into its head. This patch is only compile-tested. Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> --- include/linux/wfcqueue.h | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) Index: linux/include/linux/wfcqueue.h =================================================================== --- linux.orig/include/linux/wfcqueue.h +++ linux/include/linux/wfcqueue.h @@ -55,14 +55,16 @@ * [4] __wfcq_splice (source queue) * [5] __wfcq_first * [6] __wfcq_next + * [7] __wfcq_enqueue_head * - * [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] - * [1] - - - - - - - * [2] - - - - - - - * [3] - - X X X X - * [4] - - X - X X - * [5] - - X X - - - * [6] - - X X - - + * [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] + * [1] - - - - - - - + * [2] - - - - - - X + * [3] - - X X X X X + * [4] - - X - X X X + * [5] - - X X - - X + * [6] - - X X - - X + * [7] - X X X X X X * * Besides locking, mutual exclusion of dequeue, splice and iteration * can be ensured by performing all of those operations from a single @@ -230,6 +232,44 @@ ___wfcq_node_sync_next(struct wfcq_node } /* + * __wfcq_enqueue_head: prepend a node into a queue. + * + * No memory barriers are issued. Mutual exclusion is the responsibility + * of the caller. + * + * Returns false if the queue was empty prior to adding the node. + * Returns true otherwise. + */ +static inline bool __wfcq_enqueue_head(struct wfcq_head *head, + struct wfcq_tail *tail, + struct wfcq_node *node) +{ + bool not_empty = 0; + + /* + * Move tail if queue was empty. Tail pointer is the + * linearization point of enqueuers. + */ + if (cmpxchg(&tail->p, &head->node, node) != &head->node) { + not_empty = 1; + /* + * Queue was non-empty. We need to wait for + * head->node.next to become non-NULL, because a + * concurrent wfcq_append may be updating it. + */ + node->next = ___wfcq_node_sync_next(&head->node); + } + /* + * From this point, we know that wfcq_append cannot touch + * head->node.next, either because we successfully moved tail->p + * to node, or because we waited for head->node.next to become + * non-NULL. It is therefore safe to update it. + */ + head->node.next = node; + return not_empty; +} + +/* * __wfcq_first: get first node of a queue, without dequeuing. * * Content written into the node before enqueue is guaranteed to be -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists