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  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, 23 Jan 2017 18:45:28 -0800
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, boqun.feng@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        bobby.prani@...il.com, peterz@...radead.org, fweisbec@...il.com,
        dvhart@...ux.intel.com, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
        josh@...htriplett.org, dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
        mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, oleg@...hat.com,
        dipankar@...ibm.com, will.deacon@....com,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/3] srcu: Force full grace-period ordering

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 07:12:03PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> 
> > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 11:54:17AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:35:50AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> > * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > [ . . . ]
> >
> >> > > + */
> >> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC
> >> > > +#define smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()	smp_mb()  /* Full ordering for lock. */
> >> > > +#else /* #ifdef CONFIG_PPC */
> >> > > +#define smp_mb__after_unlock_lock()	do { } while (0)
> >> > > +#endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PPC */
> >> > 
> >> > Yeah, so I realize that this was pre-existing code, but putting CONFIG_$ARCH
> >> > #ifdefs into generic headers is generally frowned upon.
> >> > 
> >> > The canonical approach would be either to define a helper Kconfig variable that 
> >> > can be set by PPC (but other architectures don't need to set it), or to expose a 
> >> > suitable macro (function) for architectures to define in their barrier.h arch 
> >> > header file.
> >> 
> >> Very well, I will add a separate commit for this.  4.11 OK?
> >
> > Does the patch below seem reasonable?
> >
> > 							Thanx, Paul
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > commit 271c0601237c41a279f975563e13837bace0df03
> > Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Date:   Sat Jan 14 13:32:50 2017 -0800
> >
> >     rcu: Make arch select smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() strength
> >     
> >     The definition of smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() is currently smp_mb()
> >     for CONFIG_PPC and a no-op otherwise.  It would be better to instead
> >     provide an architecture-selectable Kconfig option, and select the
> >     strength of smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() based on that option.  This
> >     commit therefore creates CONFIG_ARCH_WEAK_RELACQ, has PPC select it,
> >     and bases the definition of smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() on this new
> >     CONFIG_ARCH_WEAK_RELACQ Kconfig option.
> >     
> >     Reported-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> >     Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >     Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> >     Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
> >     Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >     Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
> >     Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
> >     Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
> >     Cc: <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
> 
> Personally I'd call it ARCH_WEAK_RELEASE_ACQUIRE, which is longer but
> clearer I think. But it's not a big deal, so which ever you prefer.

ARCH_WEAK_RELEASE_ACQUIRE it is!

> Acked-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>

Applied, thank you!

							Thanx, Paul

Powered by blists - more mailing lists