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, 20 Feb 2017 12:28:44 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Stafford Horne <shorne@...il.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
        Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson@...nalahti.fi>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the openrisc tree

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 12:18:05PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 04:26:54PM +0900, Stafford Horne wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 12:43:21PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
> > > 
> > >   arch/openrisc/include/asm/Kbuild
> > > 
> > > between commit:
> > > 
> > >   157e82f58007 ("openrisc: add cmpxchg and xchg implementations")
> 
> *groan* branch delay slots...
> 
> 
> It it typically recommended to implement 1 and 2 byte versions as well.
> If the architecture doesn't support these natively, you can easily
> implement them with the 4 byte ll/sc and simply retain the other bits.

While there; I spotted commit 8ffa662370f0 ("openrisc: add optimized
atomic operations") which doesn't make any kind of sense to me.

Have you actually read the asm-generic/atomic.h file you're including?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists