linux-kernel - Re: single copy atomicity for double load/stores on 32-bit systems

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:   Mon, 3 Jun 2019 21:59:03 +0000
From:   Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
To:     "paulmck@...ux.ibm.com" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
CC:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
        arcml <linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: single copy atomicity for double load/stores on 32-bit systems

On 6/3/19 1:13 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 06:08:35PM +0000, Vineet Gupta wrote:
>> On 5/31/19 1:21 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>> I'm not sure how to interpret "natural alignment" for the case of double
>>>> load/stores on 32-bit systems where the hardware and ABI allow for 4 byte
>>>> alignment (ARCv2 LDD/STD, ARM LDRD/STRD ....)
>>> Natural alignment: !((uintptr_t)ptr % sizeof(*ptr))
>>>
>>> For any u64 type, that would give 8 byte alignment. the problem
>>> otherwise being that your data spans two lines/pages etc..
>> Sure, but as Paul said, if the software doesn't expect them to be atomic by
>> default, they could span 2 hardware lines to keep the implementation simpler/sane.
> I could imagine 8-byte types being only four-byte aligned on 32-bit systems,
> but it would be quite a surprise on 64-bit systems.

Totally agree !

Thx,
-Vineet