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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMZfGtUfefDjTw-rSfv=OHQzDWpvAFJtspOrv3+J2hCRFoLBAA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 19 Aug 2021 10:04:06 +0800
From:   Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        yanghui <yanghui.def@...edance.com>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm/mempolicy: fix a race between offset_il_node and mpol_rebind_task

On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 11:07 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 10:02:46PM +0800, Muchun Song wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 9:43 AM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> > > > > +   unsigned int target, nnodes;
> > > > >     int i;
> > > > >     int nid;
> > > > > +   /*
> > > > > +    * The barrier will stabilize the nodemask in a register or on
> > > > > +    * the stack so that it will stop changing under the code.
> > > > > +    *
> > > > > +    * Between first_node() and next_node(), pol->nodes could be changed
> > > > > +    * by other threads. So we put pol->nodes in a local stack.
> > > > > +    */
> > > > > +   barrier();
> > >
> > > I think this could be an smp_rmb()?
> >
> > Hi Matthew,
> >
> > I have a question. Why is barrier() not enough?
>
> I think barrier() may be more than is necessary.  We don't need a
> barrier on non-SMP systems (or do we?)  And we only need to order reads,
> not writes.

Here barrier() is just a compiler barrier, which is cheaper than
smp_rmb() which usually equals to memory barrier instruction
plus barrier(). So I think barrier() , which will stabilize the
nodemask in a register or on the stack, is more appropriate here.

Thanks.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ