linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 03/15] Provide atomic_t functions implemented with ISO-C++11 atomics

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]

Message-ID: <20160519074536.GR3193@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Thu, 19 May 2016 09:45:36 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	x86@...nel.org, will.deacon@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	ramana.radhakrishnan@....com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 03/15] Provide atomic_t functions implemented with
 ISO-C++11 atomics

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 08:36:49AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-05-18 at 19:32 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > 
> > Does this generate 'sane' code for LL/SC archs? That is, a single LL/SC
> > loop and not a loop around an LL/SC cmpxchg.
> 
> The whole point of using compiler intrinsics and letting the compiler
> actually see what's going on... is that it bloody well should :)

Should and does be two different things of course ;-)