[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181031101124.GO744@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 11:11:24 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...il.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
linux-integrity <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...wei.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/17] prmem: documentation
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 12:15:46AM +0200, Igor Stoppa wrote:
> On 30/10/2018 23:02, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > But I dislike allowing regular writes in the protected region. We
> > really only need four write primitives:
> >
> > 1. Just write one value. Call at any time (except NMI).
> >
> > 2. Just copy some bytes. Same as (1) but any number of bytes.
> >
> > 3,4: Same as 1 and 2 but must be called inside a special rare write
> > region. This is purely an optimization.
>
> Atomic? RCU?
RCU can be done, that's not really a problem. Atomics otoh are a
problem. Having pointers makes them just work.
Andy; I understand your reason for not wanting them, but I really don't
want to duplicate everything. Is there something we can do with static
analysis to make you more comfortable with the pointer thing?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists