linux-kernel - Re: Linux 3.19-rc3

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: <20150106120121.GB26845@kmo-pixel>
Date:	Tue, 6 Jan 2015 04:01:21 -0800
From:	Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...emonkey.org.uk>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Chris Mason <clm@...com>
Subject: Re: Linux 3.19-rc3

On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 12:48:42PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> 
> Looking at that closure stuff, why is there an smp_mb() in
> closure_wake_up() ? Typically wakeup only needs to imply a wmb.
> 
> Also note that __closure_wake_up() starts with a fully serializing
> instruction (xchg) and thereby already implies the full barrier.

Probably no good reason, that code is pretty old :)

If I was to hazard a guess, I had my own lockless linked lists before llist.h
existed and perhaps I did it with atomic_xchg() - which was at least documented
to not imply a barrier. I suppose it should just be dropped.
--
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/