linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND] random: use correct memory barriers for crng_node

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: <YcCjXjouk6NqzPSK@quark>
Date:   Mon, 20 Dec 2021 09:38:06 -0600
From:   Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To:     "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc:     Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] random: use correct memory barriers for
 crng_node_pool

On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 04:17:59PM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 19, 2021 at 3:52 AM Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org> wrote:
> > +
> > +static inline struct crng_state *select_crng(void)
> > +{
> > +
> > +static inline struct crng_state *select_crng(void)
> > +{
> 
> Usually static inline is avoided in .c files. Any special reason why
> we'd need this especially much here? Those functions are pretty small
> and I assume will be inlined anyway on most architectures.
> 
> I just did a test on x86_64 with GCC 11, and the same file was
> produced with 'static' as with 'static inline'. Was there an
> arch/config/compiler combo you were concerned about here?

No special reason, this is just a bad habit.  I'm fine with omitting 'inline'
here.

- Eric