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: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 16:30:08 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com>, 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 12:47:53PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 02:57:37PM -0500, Peter Hurley wrote: [ . . . ] > David Miller's call, actually. > > But the rule is that if it is an atomic read-modify-write operation and it > returns a value, then the operation itself needs to include full memory > barriers before and after (as in the caller doesn't need to add them). > Otherwise, the operation does not need to include memory ordering. > Since xchg(), atomic_xchg(), and atomic_long_xchg() all return a value, > their implementations must include full memory barriers before and after. > > Pretty straightforward. ;-) Hello again, Peter, Were you going to push a patch clarifying this? Thanx, Paul -- 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