linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] tools: memory-model: Make plain accesses carry dependencies

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:   Thu, 1 Dec 2022 17:21:45 +0000
From:   Jonas Oberhauser <jonas.oberhauser@...wei.com>
To:     Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
        Jonas Oberhauser <jonas.oberhauser@...weicloud.com>
CC:     "paulmck@...nel.org" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        "parri.andrea@...il.com" <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
        "will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
        "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "boqun.feng@...il.com" <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        "npiggin@...il.com" <npiggin@...il.com>,
        "dhowells@...hat.com" <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        "j.alglave@....ac.uk" <j.alglave@....ac.uk>,
        "luc.maranget@...ia.fr" <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>,
        "akiyks@...il.com" <akiyks@...il.com>,
        "dlustig@...dia.com" <dlustig@...dia.com>,
        "joel@...lfernandes.org" <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        "urezki@...il.com" <urezki@...il.com>,
        "quic_neeraju@...cinc.com" <quic_neeraju@...cinc.com>,
        "frederic@...nel.org" <frederic@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] tools: memory-model: Make plain accesses carry
 dependencies

Thanks a lot for the helpful and detailed comments!
Three minor points before I send a new patch:

> even if W' or R' (or both!) is plain.	

The "is" sounds slightly weird to me in the sentence because the last part I read is 
"(or both!)", so I would slightly prefer "are" here.

> On the other hand, if you change the second "dependencies" to "ones" and "unmarked" to "plain", maybe the whole thing will fit on one line.

It fits even if I changed the second dependencies to "those" instead of "ones", i.e.,
(* Redefine dependencies to include those carried through plain accesses *)

which I would prefer.

> if you replaced the whole conditional with a simple
>	WRITE_ONCE(*y, *z2);
> then the litmus test would become an example of OOTA!

In my opinion it is already an example of OOTA, which I would define as an
   rfi | ctrl | addr | data | fence
cycle.

Let me know if you agree with these deviations from your suggestion
and have a great time,

jonas

PS: 
> When a colon is followed by a clause (as opposed to a list), it is customary to capitalize the first letter of that clause, just like we capitalize the first letter at the start of a sentence.

In German, we also capitalize after a colon; but my English teachers used to deduct many points throughout my adolescent life whenever I capitalized like that. I still remember some of that red ink with near perfect clarity. So I eventually really took it to heart and started pedantically not-capitalizing after every colon.
Now the only time it ever mattered in my adult life, I find that I should do it German Style (or, as I just learned, APA & AP Style).
I suppose life is that way sometimes.

have a lot of fun,
jonas