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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 16:55:34 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Chris Mason <clm@...com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kthread: add barriers to set_kthread_struct() and to_kthread() On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 11:38:43AM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 11:33:01AM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > > > And perhaps we should add another helper, say, > > > > > > #define lockless_assign_pointer(ptr, val) \ > > > smp_store_release(&ptr, val) > > > > > > for set_kthread_struct() ? it can have more users. > > > > > > Not that I think you should change your patch, I am just asking. > > > > Ah yeah, that would look better. I vaguely remembered the new macro > > but couldn't quite remember it fully. :) Will update the patch. > > Oops, as for adding lockless_assign_pointer(), wouldn't smp_wmb() be a > better match for smp_read_barrier_depends()? ISTR acquire/release > pairs being more expensive on some archs. 88c1863066cc ("rcu: Define rcu_assign_pointer() in terms of smp_store_release()")
Powered by blists - more mailing lists