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: <20150208012040.GA4764@kroah.com>
Date:	Sun, 8 Feb 2015 09:20:40 +0800
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	Michael Cree <mcree@...on.net.nz>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org, Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
	Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
	Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>,
	Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] llist: Fix missing lockless_dereference()

On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 02:12:04PM +1300, Michael Cree wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 08:59:41AM +0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 01:47:29PM +1300, Michael Cree wrote:
> > > On Sat, Feb 07, 2015 at 10:30:44PM +0000, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Feb 06, 2015 at 09:08:21PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > > > > A lockless_dereference() appears to be missing in llist_del_first().
> > > > > > It should only matter for Alpha in practice.
> > > 
> > > What could one anticipate to be the symptoms of such a missing
> > > lockless_dereference()?
> > > 
> > > The Alpha kernel is behaving pretty well provided one builds a machine
> > > specific kernel and UP.  When running an SMP kernel some packages
> > > (most notably the java runtime, but there are a few others) occasionally
> > > lock up in a pthread call --- could be a problem in libc rather then the
> > > kernel.
> > 
> > Hm, if only UP alpha needs to be supported, odds are we could rip a lot
> > of odd stuff out of the kernel that deals with memory barriers and other
> > nasty locking things that the Alpha requires.
> > 
> > Would that be ok?  Or is someone somewhere going to want to be running a
> > SMP kernel on Alpha in the future?
> 
> I am running an SMP kernel on a 3-cpu Alpha system; it mostly works
> just fine.
> 
> I was just noting that there is something up with java---it locks up
> occassionally in a pthread call, and there are a few other packages
> that occasionally fail in test suites when being built under an SMP
> kernel but always pass when built under an UP kernel which suggests
> there is a little buglet somewhere in the SMP code, either in the
> kernel or in libc.
> 
> Running an SMP system for the Debian Alpha build daemon at debian-ports
> is really useful for keeping up with the other architectures.

Ok, sorry, I got the impression that you weren't running a SMP kernel,
nevermind then, we'll go back to keeping this ancient beast alive :)

greg k-h
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ