linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 0/4] Introducing a queue read/write lock implementation

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140130181643.GJ5002@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Thu, 30 Jan 2014 19:16:43 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc:	Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@...com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	George Spelvin <linux@...izon.com>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
	"Aswin Chandramouleeswaran\"" <aswin@...com>,
	Scott J Norton <scott.norton@...com>,
	"will@...ldeacon.co.uk" <will@...ldeacon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 0/4] Introducing a queue read/write lock
 implementation

On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 06:11:36PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 06:05:33PM +0000, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 05:52:12PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > It would be nice if these were default implementations of the unlock, then
> > > architectures just implement atomic_sub_release how they like.
> > 
> > Yes, I suppose that makes sense. Last time I proposed the primitive
> > nobody yelled at me, so I suppose that means people agree :-)
> 
> If it's useful for these qrwlocks, that's good enough for me!

There's the qspinlock that can also use it.

> Have you looked at the OpenCL atomic intrinsics at all?
> 
>   http://www.khronos.org/registry/cl/sdk/1.2/docs/man/xhtml/atomicFunctions.html
> 
> There's a good chance that they can be implemented efficiently on any
> architectures that care about OpenCL. As you've noticed, composing them
> together can be more efficient on LL/SC-based architectures too.

Never looked at OpenCL, I'll have a look.

> Okey doke. If you need a stable (non-rebasing) branch, just holler.

Nah, who cares about those anyway :-)
--
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/