linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/5] mips/atomic: Fix loongson_llsc

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, 24 Apr 2019 14:59:13 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     stern@...land.harvard.edu, akiyks@...il.com,
        andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com, boqun.feng@...il.com,
        dlustig@...dia.com, dhowells@...hat.com, j.alglave@....ac.uk,
        luc.maranget@...ia.fr, npiggin@...il.com, paulmck@...ux.ibm.com,
        will.deacon@....com
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        Huacai Chen <chenhc@...ote.com>,
        Huang Pei <huangpei@...ngson.cn>,
        Paul Burton <paul.burton@...s.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/5] mips/atomic: Fix loongson_llsc_mb() wreckage

On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 02:36:58PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> The comment describing the loongson_llsc_mb() reorder case doesn't
> make any sense what so ever. Instruction re-ordering is not an SMP
> artifact, but rather a CPU local phenomenon. This means that _every_
> LL/SC loop needs this barrier right in front to avoid the CPU from
> leaking a memop inside it.
> 
> For the branch speculation case; if futex_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic()
> needs one at the bne branch target, then surely the normal
> __cmpxch_asmg() implementation does too. We cannot rely on the
> barriers from cmpxchg() because cmpxchg_local() is implemented with
> the same macro, and branch prediction and speculation are, too, CPU
> local.

Also; just doing them all makes for much simpler rules and less
mistakes.