linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 17/19] locking/barriers: Kill lockless

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20171024094435.GC17909@arm.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 Oct 2017 10:44:35 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, snitzer@...hat.com,
        thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
        davem@...emloft.net, shuah@...nel.org, mpe@...erman.id.au,
        tj@...nel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/19] locking/barriers: Kill lockless_dereference

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:31:04AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
> > 
> > lockless_dereference is a nice idea, but its gained little traction in
> > kernel code since it's introduction three years ago. This is partly
> 
> s/its/it
> s/it's/its

Crikey, no idea what happened there!

> > because it's a pain to type, but also because using READ_ONCE instead
> > will work correctly on all architectures apart from Alpha, which is a
> > fully supported but somewhat niche architecture these days.
> > 
> > This patch moves smp_read_barrier_depends() (a NOP on all architectures
> > other than Alpha) from lockless_dereference into READ_ONCE, converts
> > the few actual users over to READ_ONCE and then finally removes
> > lockless_dereference altogether.
> 
> Nit: if we refer to smp_read_barrier_depends() with parentheses (which is the nice 
> thing to do for function-alike symbols), then we should do the same with 
> READ_ONCE() and lockless_dereference() as well.
> 
> Also, could we please split this into three patches:
> 
>  #1: Add smp_read_barrier_depends() to READ_ONCE()
>  #2: Convert all lockless_dereference() users to READ_ONCE()
>  #3: Remove the now unused lockless_dereference() API
> 
> to make it easier to analyze if bisected to, should any problems arise?

Sure, I'll do that now.

Will