linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 03/78] xarray: Add the xa_lock to the radix_tree

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]

Date:   Tue, 26 Dec 2017 19:58:15 -0800
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
        Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Rehas Sachdeva <aquannie@...il.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-nilfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-raid@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 03/78] xarray: Add the xa_lock to the radix_tree_root

On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 07:43:40PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>     Also add the xa_lock() and xa_unlock() family of wrappers to make it
>     easier to use the lock.  If we could rely on -fplan9-extensions in
>     the compiler, we could avoid all of this syntactic sugar, but that
>     wasn't added until gcc 4.6.

Oh, in case anyone's wondering, here's how I'd do it with plan9 extensions:

struct xarray {
        spinlock_t;
        int xa_flags;
        void *xa_head;
};

...
        spin_lock_irqsave(&mapping->pages, flags);
        __delete_from_page_cache(page, NULL);
        spin_unlock_irqrestore(&mapping->pages, flags);
...

The plan9 extensions permit passing a pointer to a struct which has an
unnamed element to a function which is expecting a pointer to the type
of that element.  The compiler does any necessary arithmetic to produce 
a pointer.  It's exactly as if I had written:

        spin_lock_irqsave(&mapping->pages.xa_lock, flags);
        __delete_from_page_cache(page, NULL);
        spin_unlock_irqrestore(&mapping->pages.xa_lock, flags);

More details here: https://9p.io/sys/doc/compiler.html