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]
Date:	Thu, 06 Feb 2014 18:55:01 +0000
From:	Ramana Radhakrishnan <>
To:	David Howells <>
CC:	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>,
	Will Deacon <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] arch: atomic rework

On 02/06/14 18:25, David Howells wrote:
> Is it worth considering a move towards using C11 atomics and barriers and
> compiler intrinsics inside the kernel?  The compiler _ought_ to be able to do
> these.

It sounds interesting to me, if we can make it work properly and 
reliably. + for others in the GCC community to chip in.

> One thing I'm not sure of, though, is how well gcc's atomics will cope with
> interrupt handlers touching atomics on CPUs without suitable atomic
> instructions - that said, userspace does have to deal with signals getting
> underfoot. but then userspace can't normally disable interrupts.
> David


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists