linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] sys_membarrier (x86, generic)

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]

Date:	Tue, 06 Oct 2015 09:51:39 +1030
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...abs.org>
To:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] sys_membarrier (x86, generic)

Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> writes:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Here is a repost of sys_membarrier, rebased on top of Linus commit
> c4b5fd3fb2058b650447372472ad24e2a989f9f6 without any change since the
> last v19 post other that proceeding to further testing. When merging
> with other system calls, system call number conflicts should be quite
> straightforward to handle, there is nothing special there.

Hi Mathieu,

        Great to see this go in!  One small note: it talks about
threads, but membarrier as currently implemented would cover any shared
memory.  If you plan to optimize in future, that might not be the case:
we'd want an address argument for those cases?

Cheers,
Rusty.
--
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/