linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH V3 1/2] x86/msr: add msr_set/clear_bit_on

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1703282032430.2432@nanos>
Date:   Tue, 28 Mar 2017 20:34:14 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...el.com>
cc:     "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>, "acme@...nel.org" <acme@...nel.org>,
        "eranian@...gle.com" <eranian@...gle.com>,
        "jolsa@...nel.org" <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        "ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V3 1/2] x86/msr: add msr_set/clear_bit_on_cpu/cpus access
 functions

On Tue, 28 Mar 2017, Liang, Kan wrote:
> Thanks. It simplify the code very much.
> I think we still need to protect the smp_call_function in the driver, right?

Yes.

> Would be the following code enough?
> 
> get_online_cpus();
> preempt_disable();

Only get_online_cpus(). smp_call_function() disables preemption internaly.

Thanks,

	tglx