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, 22 Aug 2016 10:15:28 +0800
From:   Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>
To:     Waiman Long <waiman.long@....com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
        Jason Low <jason.low2@...com>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Scott J Norton <scott.norton@....com>,
        Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH-tip v4 07/10] locking/rwsem: Change RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS
 for better disambiguation

2016-08-20 0:21 GMT+08:00 Waiman Long <waiman.long@....com>:
> On 08/19/2016 01:57 AM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>
>> 2016-08-19 5:11 GMT+08:00 Waiman Long<Waiman.Long@....com>:
>>>
>>> When the count value is in between 0 and RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS, there
>>> are 2 possibilities.
>>> Either a writer is present and there is no waiter
>>
>> count = 0xffff0001
>>
>>> or there are waiters and readers. There is no easy way to
>>
>> count = 0xffff000X
>>
>> However, RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS is equal to 0xffff0000, so both these two
>> cases are beyond RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS, right?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Wanpeng Li
>
>
> Perhaps I should make it clear that I am talking from a signed quantity
> point of view (it is an atomic_long_t). So
>
>     RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS < RWSEM_ACTIVE_WRITE_BIAS < 0
>
> Hope this clarify your question.

Yeah, thank you. :)

Regards,
Wanpeng Li

Powered by blists - more mailing lists