linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] arch: atomic rework

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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1402172311000.2486@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 17 Feb 2014 23:12:54 +0000
From:	"Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@...esourcery.com>
To:	Torvald Riegel <triegel@...hat.com>
CC:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ramana Radhakrishnan <Ramana.Radhakrishnan@....com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
	"gcc@....gnu.org" <gcc@....gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] arch: atomic rework

On Mon, 17 Feb 2014, Torvald Riegel wrote:

> On Mon, 2014-02-17 at 18:59 +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > On Sat, 15 Feb 2014, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> > 
> > > glibc is a counterexample that comes to mind, although it's a smaller
> > > code base.  (It's currently not using C11 atomics, but transitioning
> > > there makes sense, and some thing I want to get to eventually.)
> > 
> > glibc is using C11 atomics (GCC builtins rather than _Atomic / 
> > <stdatomic.h>, but using __atomic_* with explicitly specified memory model 
> > rather than the older __sync_*) on AArch64, plus in certain cases on ARM 
> > and MIPS.
> 
> I think the major steps remaining is moving the other architectures
> over, and rechecking concurrent code (e.g., for the code that I have

I don't think we'll be ready to require GCC >= 4.7 to build glibc for 
another year or two, although probably we could move the requirement up 
from 4.4 to 4.6.  (And some platforms only had the C11 atomics optimized 
later than 4.7.)

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@...esourcery.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/