[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202009260930.9252966D@keescook>
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2020 09:33:17 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: corbet@....net, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, shuah@...nel.org,
rafael@...nel.org, johannes@...solutions.net, lenb@...nel.org,
james.morse@....com, tony.luck@...el.com, bp@...en8.de,
arve@...roid.com, tkjos@...roid.com, maco@...roid.com,
joel@...lfernandes.org, christian@...uner.io, hridya@...gle.com,
surenb@...gle.com, minyard@....org, arnd@...db.de,
mchehab@...nel.org, rric@...nel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-edac@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] Introduce Simple atomic and non-atomic counters
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 06:13:37PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 9/25/20 5:52 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > > -- Addressed Kees's comments:
> > > 1. Non-atomic counters renamed to counter_simple32 and counter_simple64
> > > to clearly indicate size.
> > > 2. Added warning for counter_simple* usage and it should be used only
> > > when there is no need for atomicity.
> > > 3. Renamed counter_atomic to counter_atomic32 to clearly indicate size.
> > > 4. Renamed counter_atomic_long to counter_atomic64 and it now uses
> > > atomic64_t ops and indicates size.
> > > 5. Test updated for the API renames.
> > > 6. Added helper functions for test results printing
> > > 7. Verified that the test module compiles in kunit env. and test
> > > module can be loaded to run the test.
> >
> > Thanks for all of this!
> >
> > > 8. Updated Documentation to reflect the intent to make the API
> > > restricted so it can never be used to guard object lifetimes
> > > and state management. I left _return ops for now, inc_return
> > > is necessary for now as per the discussion we had on this topic.
> >
> > I still *really* do not want dec_return() to exist. That is asking for
> > trouble. I'd prefer inc_return() not exist either, but I can live with
> > it. ;)
> >
>
> Thanks. I am equally concerned about adding anything that can be used to
> guard object lifetimes. So I will make sure this set won't expand and
> plan to remove dec_return() if we don't find any usages.
I would like it much stronger than "if". dec_return() needs to be just
dec() and read(). It will not be less efficient (since they're both
inlines), but it _will_ create a case where the atomicity cannot be used
for ref counting. My point is that anything that _requires_ dec_return()
(or, frankly, inc_return()) is _not_ "just" a statistical counter. It
may not be a refcounter, but it relies on the inc/dec atomicity for some
reason beyond counting in once place and reporting it in another.
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists