linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] atomics: generate atomic headers

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: <20180605141416.GW12198@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Tue, 5 Jun 2018 16:14:16 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, boqun.feng@...il.com,
        will.deacon@....com, arnd@...db.de, aryabinin@...tuozzo.com,
        dvyukov@...gle.com, glider@...gle.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        jslaby@...e.com, parri.andrea@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] atomics: generate atomic headers

On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 02:58:23PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:

> Sure, it all works, it's just less than optimal as above, and also means
> that we have to duplicate the ifdeffery for optional atomics -- once in
> the instrumented atomics, then in the "real" atomics.
> 
> Whereas if we filled in the raw atomics atop of the arch atomics,
> everything above that can assume the whole API is present, no ifdeffery
> required.

Aah, I see your point now. I don't think performance is a particular
concern when you enable K*SAN, but getting rid of a fair bunch of
ifdeffery is always nice.