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, 6 May 2020 14:33:33 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [patch V4 part 1 06/36] compiler: Simple READ/WRITE_ONCE()
 implementations

On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 03:16:08PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> READ/WRITE_ONCE_NOCHECK() is required for atomics in code which cannot be
> instrumented like the x86 int3 text poke code. As READ/WRITE_ONCE() is
> undergoing a rewrite, provide __{READ,WRITE}_ONCE_SCALAR().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> ---
>  include/linux/compiler.h |    8 ++++++++
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> 
> --- a/include/linux/compiler.h
> +++ b/include/linux/compiler.h
> @@ -313,6 +313,14 @@ unsigned long read_word_at_a_time(const
>  	__u.__val;					\
>  })
>  
> +#define __READ_ONCE_SCALAR(x)				\
> +	(*(const volatile typeof(x) *)&(x))
> +
> +#define __WRITE_ONCE_SCALAR(x, val)			\
> +do {							\
> +	*(volatile typeof(x) *)&(x) = val;		\
> +} while (0)

FWIW, these end up being called __READ_ONCE() and __WRITE_ONCE() after
the rewrite; the *_SCALAR() variants will call into kcsan_check_atomic_*().

If you go with that naming now, then any later conflict should fall out in
the wash.

Will

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ