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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 12:02:00 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com> Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, 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@...nel.org>, Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>, Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC 2/3] tools/memory-model: Add a litmus test for atomic_set() On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 07:52:15AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > I agree, and thanks for the suggestion! And I change the sentence in > atomic_t.txt with: > > A note for the implementation of atomic_set{}() is that it > cannot break the atomicity of the RMW ops. > > , since I think that part of the doc is more about the suggestion to > anyone who want to implement the atomic_set(). Peter, is that OK to you? Sure.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists