| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 19:02:44 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>, Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, virtualization <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de> Subject: [PATCH v5 3/5] x86: tweak the comment about use of wmb for IO On x86, we *do* still use the non-nop rmb/wmb for IO barriers, but even that is generally questionable. Leave them around as historial unless somebody can point to a case where they care about the performance, but tweak the comment so people don't think they are strictly required in all cases. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> --- arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h index a291745..bfb28ca 100644 --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ /* * Force strict CPU ordering. - * And yes, this is required on UP too when we're talking + * And yes, this might be required on UP too when we're talking * to devices. */ -- MST
Powered by blists - more mailing lists