linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] locking: Clarify requirements for smp_mb__after

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: <20180628135206.GA16107@andrea>
Date:   Thu, 28 Jun 2018 15:52:06 +0200
From:   Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com>
To:     Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>,
        Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>,
        Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] locking: Clarify requirements for
 smp_mb__after_spinlock()

> > + * smp_mb__after_spinlock() provides a full memory barrier between po-earlier
> > + * lock acquisitions and po-later memory accesses.
> 
> How about saying "provides the equivalent of a full memory barrier"?
> 
> The point being that smp_mb__after_spinlock doesn't have to provide an
> actual barrier; it just has to ensure the behavior is the same as if a
> full barrier were present.

Agreed; will fix in the next version.  Thanks,

  Andrea


> 
> Alan
>