linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/5] locking/mcs: Relax to atomic/release semantics

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]

Date:	Sun, 20 Sep 2015 11:26:32 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] locking/mcs: Relax to atomic/release semantics

On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 3:11 AM, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net> wrote:
> ... by using acquire semantics where appropriate As such, weakly
> ordered archs can benefit from more relaxed use of barriers when
> issuing atomics.

Again, subject is wrong.

Also, I actually think you should avoid using the word "relax", since
that actually has a separate meaning for the atomics, and it is *not*
using those relaxed semantics, and they wouldn't work anyway.

So you might as well just say something like

    "locking: use acquire/release semantics"

or similar. Ok?

                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/