linux-kernel - Re: softlockups in multi_cpu

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: <CA+55aFz3E6KNH4Z0ntAJfTXo=p1aduuTjotdTVy5BjTj4CoP1A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 6 Mar 2015 13:24:36 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Jason Low <jason.low2@...com>
Cc:	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...emonkey.org.uk>
Subject: Re: softlockups in multi_cpu_stop

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Jason Low <jason.low2@...com> wrote:
>
> +       while (true) {
> +               if (sem->owner != owner)
> +                       break;

That looks *really* odd.

Why is this not

        while (sem->owner == owner) {

Also, this "barrier()" now lost the comment:

> +               barrier();

so it looks very odd indeed.

                     Linus
--
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/