linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 03/21] list: Annotate lockless list primitives with data

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: <CAG48ez2WJo5+wqWi1nxstR=WWyseVfZPMnpdDBsZKW5G+Tt3KQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 Mar 2020 17:56:15 +0100
From:   Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Maddie Stone <maddiestone@...gle.com>,
        Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        kernel-team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
        Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 03/21] list: Annotate lockless list primitives with data_race()

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 5:51 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 03:36:25PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > diff --git a/include/linux/list.h b/include/linux/list.h
> > index 4fed5a0f9b77..4d9f5f9ed1a8 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/list.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/list.h
> > @@ -279,7 +279,7 @@ static inline int list_is_last(const struct list_head *list,
> >   */
> >  static inline int list_empty(const struct list_head *head)
> >  {
> > -     return READ_ONCE(head->next) == head;
> > +     return data_race(READ_ONCE(head->next) == head);
> >  }
>
> list_empty() isn't lockless safe, that's what we have
> list_empty_careful() for.

That thing looks like it could also use some READ_ONCE() sprinkled in...