linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] locking/mutex: Set and clear owner using WRITE

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: <20160523213123.c5qdhz23xy5ziqik@linux-uzut.site>
Date:	Mon, 23 May 2016 14:31:23 -0700
From:	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To:	Jason Low <jason.low2@....com>
Cc:	jason.low2@...com, Waiman Long <waiman.long@....com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Terry Rudd <terry.rudd@....com>,
	Scott J Norton <scott.norton@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/mutex: Set and clear owner using WRITE_ONCE()

On Mon, 23 May 2016, Jason Low wrote:

>On Fri, 2016-05-20 at 18:00 -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 May 2016, Waiman Long wrote:
>>
>> >I think mutex-debug.h also needs similar changes for completeness.
>>
>> Maybe, but given that with debug the wait_lock is unavoidable, doesn't
>> this send the wrong message?
>
>The mutex_set_owner() and mutex_clear_owner() can still get called in
>the fastpath without the wait_lock for the debug case too correct?

The fastpath is a nop, see mutex-null:

#define __mutex_fastpath_lock(count, fail_fn)		fail_fn(count)

In anycase, if there were a fastpath, that would at least have an
ACQUIRE barrier (unless you set ->owner it before it or something
weird). But this isn't the case, so debug should be safe afaict.

Thanks,
Davidlohr