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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 14:34:15 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: "Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "viro@...iv.linux.org.uk" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, "tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>, "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>, "hannes@...xchg.org" <hannes@...xchg.org>, "lizefan@...wei.com" <lizefan@...wei.com>, "acme@...nel.org" <acme@...nel.org>, "alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com" <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>, "eparis@...hat.com" <eparis@...hat.com>, "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>, "luto@...nel.org" <luto@...nel.org>, "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>, "dvhart@...radead.org" <dvhart@...radead.org>, "ebiederm@...ssion.com" <ebiederm@...ssion.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/15] futex: convert futex_pi_state.refcount to refcount_t On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 11:05:33AM +0000, Reshetova, Elena wrote: > Actually on the second thought: does the above memory ordering differences > really apply when we have ARCH_HAS_REFCOUNT? To me it looks like the way > how it is currently implemented for x86 is the same way as it is for atomic cases. Never look to x86 for memory ordering, its boring. And yes, for the ARM implementation it can certainly make a difference.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists