linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 22/32] s390: define __smp

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:	Mon, 4 Jan 2016 14:45:25 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
	sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-metag@...r.kernel.org, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
	x86@...nel.org, user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	adi-buildroot-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org,
	xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
	Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 22/32] s390: define __smp_xxx

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 09:08:38PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> This defines __smp_xxx barriers for s390,
> for use by virtualization.
> 
> Some smp_xxx barriers are removed as they are
> defined correctly by asm-generic/barriers.h
> 
> Note: smp_mb, smp_rmb and smp_wmb are defined as full barriers
> unconditionally on this architecture.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> ---
>  arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h | 15 +++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h
> index c358c31..fbd25b2 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h
> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h
> @@ -26,18 +26,21 @@
>  #define wmb()				barrier()
>  #define dma_rmb()			mb()
>  #define dma_wmb()			mb()
> -#define smp_mb()			mb()
> -#define smp_rmb()			rmb()
> -#define smp_wmb()			wmb()
> -
> -#define smp_store_release(p, v)						\
> +#define __smp_mb()			mb()
> +#define __smp_rmb()			rmb()
> +#define __smp_wmb()			wmb()
> +#define smp_mb()			__smp_mb()
> +#define smp_rmb()			__smp_rmb()
> +#define smp_wmb()			__smp_wmb()

Why define the smp_*mb() primitives here? Would not the inclusion of
asm-generic/barrier.h do this?
--
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/