linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC tools/memory-model] Add s390.{cfg,cat}

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:   Wed, 28 Mar 2018 18:33:16 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
        borntraeger@...ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, parri.andrea@...il.com,
        will.deacon@....com, boqun.feng@...il.com, npiggin@...il.com,
        dhowells@...hat.com, j.alglave@....ac.uk, luc.maranget@...ia.fr,
        akiyks@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tools/memory-model] Add s390.{cfg,cat}

On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 07:51:36PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:01:25AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > I don't quite see the point of this.  You're not suggesting that we
> > have one Linux Kernel Memory Consistency Model for s390 and another
> > one for all the other architectures, are you?
> > 
> > If the idea is merely to provide a herd model for s390 then it should 
> > go into the DIY repository, not into the LKMM repository.
> 
> I suspect the use-case was validating s390 arch code which might not
> have followed all the regular linux rules because they know its TSO. But
> yes, I'm tempted to agree that even arch specific code ought to follow
> the regular rules, just to avoid completely messing up the reader.

Another use case is testing an s390 .cat file without having to teach
herd about s390 assembly.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul