linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 14/16] locking/rwsem: Guard against making count negative

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: <20190419131522.GW14281@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Fri, 19 Apr 2019 15:15:22 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 14/16] locking/rwsem: Guard against making count
 negative

On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 03:03:04PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 02:02:07PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 12:26:47PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > I thought of a horrible horrible alternative:
> > 
> > Hurm, that's broken as heck. Let me try again.
> 
> So I can't make that scheme work, it all ends up wanting to have
> cmpxchg().
> 
> Do we have a performance comparison somewhere of xadd vs cmpxchg
> readers? I tried looking in the old threads, but I can't seem to locate
> it.
> 
> We need new instructions :/ Or more clever than I can muster just now.

In particular, an (unsigned) saturation arithmetic variant of XADD would
be very nice to have at this point.